Summary
The Ninth Circuit held that emotional distress damages are unavailable under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act because Title II incorporates the remedies of the Rehabilitation Act and Title VI, consistent with Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C. The court nevertheless held that compensatory damages for lost educational opportunities remain available and that the district court abused its discretion by remitting the jury’s damages award without considering that basis. The court reversed, vacated, and remanded with instructions to reinstate awards of $218,500 to Roy Payan and $24,000 to Portia Mason.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether LACCD forfeited its argument that emotional-distress damages are unavailable under Title II of the ADA.
- Whether emotional-distress damages are recoverable under Title II of the ADA after Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C.
- Whether compensatory damages for lost educational opportunities are available under Title II of the ADA.
- Whether the district court abused its discretion by granting remittitur without considering whether the jury's awards compensated plaintiffs for legally recoverable lost educational opportunities.
Holdings
- LACCD did not forfeit its argument that emotional-distress damages were unavailable under Title II because the specific issue had not been decided explicitly or by necessary implication in the prior appeal and dispositions.
- Emotional-distress damages are not available under Title II of the ADA.
- Plaintiffs may seek compensatory damages for educational opportunities lost as a result of a Title II ADA violation, even though emotional-distress damages are unavailable.
- The district court abused its discretion by granting remittitur without considering whether the jury's awards were based on legally recoverable lost educational opportunities; the jury's awards were consistent with the evidence and the damages instructions.
Key quotations
“Consistent with the approach articulated in Cummings, we hold that emotional distress damages are not available under Title II of the ADA, as the remedies available under Title II of the ADA are defined by the statutory text’s reference to the Rehabilitation Act.” (14)
“We agree that plaintiffs may seek compensatory damages for lost educational opportunities under Title II of the ADA.” (16)
“By failing to consider whether the jury’s award was based on the legally viable basis of lost educational opportunities, the court abused its discretion by granting remittitur.” (18)
Factual background
Roy Payan and Portia Mason, both blind students at Los Angeles City College, were approved for disability accommodations but encountered inaccessible textbooks, websites, library databases, classroom software, online platforms, and testing arrangements. They also experienced failures to honor approved accommodations and alleged that Payan was steered away from a single-semester mathematics course. On retrial, the jury found LACCD liable on fourteen allegations and intentionally liable on nine, awarding damages to Payan and Mason.
Procedural history
Plaintiffs sued LACCD under Title II of the ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act after encountering inaccessible educational materials, software, websites, and accommodation-related services. After an initial trial and appeal, the Ninth Circuit vacated the judgment in part and remanded for a new trial. On retrial, the jury found LACCD liable on fourteen factual allegations, found intentional violations on nine, and awarded $218,500 to Payan and $24,000 to Mason. The district court later granted remittitur, reducing the awards to $1,650 and $0, respectively, and plaintiffs appealed.
Remand instructions
Reverse and vacate the district court's remittitur and final judgment to the extent addressed, and remand for further proceedings consistent with the opinion and corresponding memorandum disposition, with instructions to reinstate the jury's damages award of $218,500 to Payan and $24,000 to Mason.