Lopez v. Catalina Channel Express, Inc., No. 19-55136 (9th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment for Catalina in an action brought by plaintiff, a T-10 paraplegic, under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plaintiff alleged that he was unable to use the restroom aboard the Jet Cat Express, a passenger vessel sailing between Long Beach and Santa Catalina Island, California, because the restroom's door was too narrow to allow his wheelchair to enter.
The panel affirmed the district court's conclusion that plaintiff failed to meet his initial burden of plausibly showing that the costs of widening the Jet Cat Express's restroom door do not exceed the benefits such that widening the door was shown to be "readily achievable." The panel adopted a burden-shifting framework whereby plaintiffs have the initial burden at summary judgment of plausibly showing that the cost of removing an architectural barrier does not exceed the benefits under the particular circumstances. The defendant then bears the ultimate burden of persuasion that barrier removal is not readily achievable.
Even if widening the Jet Cat Express's restroom door was not readily achievable, plaintiff could still prevail on his Title III discrimination claim if he establishes that Catalina chose not to make the restroom available to him even though it could have done so through alternative methods without much difficulty or expense. In this case, the district court did not evaluate whether Catalina made the restroom available to plaintiff through alternative methods. Therefore, the panel remanded for the district court to determine this issue in the first instance.
Court Description: Americans with Disabilities Act The panel reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant Catalina Channel Express, Inc., and remanded, in an action under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plaintiff alleged that he was unable to use the restroom aboard the passenger vessel Jet Cat Express because the restroom’s door was too narrow to allow his wheelchair to enter, and he therefore was denied public accommodations because of his disability. The panel affirmed the district court’s conclusion that plaintiff failed to meet his initial burden of plausibly showing that widening the Jet Cat Express’s restroom door was “readily achievable.” In doing so, the panel joined the Second Circuit and adopted a burden-shifting framework whereby plaintiffs have the initial burden at summary judgment of plausibly showing that the cost of removing an architectural barrier does not exceed the benefits under the particular circumstances. The defendant then bears the ultimate burden of persuasion that barrier removal is not readily achievable. The panel distinguished Molski v. Foley Estates Vineyard & Winery, LLC, 531 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2008), which places the initial burden on the defendant in a case of an architectural barrier in a historic facility. LOPEZ V. CATALINA CHANNEL EXPRESS 3 The panel nonetheless reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment because the district court did not evaluate whether Catalina made the restroom available to plaintiff through “alternative methods.” The panel instructed that on remand, the district court should determine in the first instance whether there was sufficient evidence that Catalina made the restroom “available through alternative methods” pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(v).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.