Mouton v. Cameau's Heirs

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an association suffered an Art. III injury where it demonstrated significant diversion of its resources as a result of defendants’ actions
• recognizing that Title 9 II of the ADA was modeled after § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, courts have “observed that [t]here is no significant difference in analysis of the rights and obligations created by the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act[]”
• finding an organization demonstrated standing when it presented testimony that it diverted resources away from other services to assure the defendants’ compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
• “The plaintiffs have utterly failed to point out for the Court which portions of [their] exhibits correlate to what specific ADAAG violations that they allege.”
• “Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act parallels the command of the ADA concerning accessibility to public facilities for persons with disabilities, but it applies only to ‘any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.’”
• “Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act parallels the command of the ADA concerning accessibility to public facilities for persons with disabilities, but it applies only to ‘any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).