Decision in U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California
Court Clarifies Disability
Act’s
Companion-Seating Requirements
by Steven John Fellman
NATO Washington Counsel
As part of the never-ending
saga of Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) litigation
in the motion picture theatre industry,
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
issued in the case of U.S. vs. AMC a June 24 decision explaining
the ADA wheelchair companion seating requirements.
Judge Florence Marie
Cooper ruled that for theatres built after July 1998,
there must be one wheelchair companion
seat adjacent to every wheelchair space. If you have
four wheelchair spaces, you must have four companion
seats.
However, for theatres built prior to July 1998, if two
wheelchair spaces were placed together, only one companion
seat was required.
The issue involved arose
in connection with the government’s
suit against AMC. In that suit, the government alleged
that the AMC wheelchair locations in stadium-style theatres
did not have comparable lines of sight. The government
contended that the wheelchair spaces were too close to
the screen and were not on risers in many of the older
AMC theaters. This is the same allegation that the government
brought in cases against Cinemark, Hoyts and National Amusements.
Cooper issued a ruling against AMC on the “lines
of sight issue” but held off further action with
regard to this issue until the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
issues its decision in the case of Oregon Paralyzed Veterans
vs. Regal Cinemas. The Oregon Paralyzed Veterans Association
case involves the same “line of sight” issue
and any decision reached by the 9th Circuit will be
binding on the U.S. district court judge in the U.S.
vs. AMC case.
Having decided to stop
further action on the “line
of sight” issue in the AMC case, the judge proceeded
with the government’s allegations regarding
other alleged AMC violations of the ADA. These issues
concerned
companion seat locations and allegations relating
to restrooms and counters. The government contended
these facilities
did not meet ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG)
specifications.
AMC and the government
entered into negotiations
and resolved all of the “lines of sight” issues
but not the issue of companion seating. The court
was asked to
rule on that issue.
The current ADAAG includes
language that describes “wheelchair
spaces” and language that describes “wheelchair
areas.” (Sec. 4.33.3) With regard to companion seating,
the ADAAG specifically requires that there be at least
one companion seat for each wheelchair “area.” AMC
argued that the term “wheelchair area” referred
to not only a physical area where there was one wheelchair
space but also physical areas where there was two or more
wheelchair spaces. Under this theory, AMC argued that if
it grouped two wheelchair spaces into one wheelchair “area” it
only had to provide one companion seat. As an example,
if you removed the last three seats from the end of a row
and created two wheelchair spaces, the seat that originally
was the fourth seat in the row would qualify as the companion
seat and there would be no need for a second companion
seat according to AMC. AMC directed the court’s
attention to a diagram (Figure 46) contained
in the ADAAG that depicts
two adjacent wheelchair spaces in a manner that
permits only one companion seat.
The Department of Justice
argued that the intent of the regulation was that wheelchair
patrons
were entitled
to have a companion seat next to every wheelchair
space.
The judge analyzed this
issue and concluded that the regulations did have different
language
describing
wheelchair spaces
and wheelchair areas. The judge said that
AMC’s interpretation
of this language was a reasonable interpretation. However,
in July 1998 the Department of Justice published the ADAAG
Technical Assistance Manual setting forth the requirement
that every wheelchair space, whether in a location of only
one wheelchair space or in a location with multiple wheelchair
spaces, was entitled to its own companion seat. After reviewing
the manual, the judge held that with regard to theatres
built prior to the time that the Justice Department issued
the manual (July 1998) one companion seat for each wheelchair “area” sufficed.
However, with regard to theatres built after
June 1998, the Judge ruled that there had
to be one companion seat
for every wheelchair space.
A second issue raised
in the AMC case was whether wheelchair companion seats
had to
be on the
same floor level as
the wheelchair seating space adjacent to
the companion seat.
The court ruled that a vertical deviation
amounting to “one
riser” was acceptable, but a deviation
two or more steps would certainly not be
acceptable. The decision leaves
open the question of what happens if it
requires two steps to go up one riser.
Cooper’s decision is helpful in analyzing questions
regarding companion seating. However, the proposed revised
ADAAG and the proposed revision to American National Standards
Institute (ANSI) 117.1 both require that there be one companion
seat for every wheelchair space and further that the companion
seat be at the same shoulder level and parallel to the
position that the wheelchair will be taking within the
wheelchair space. It is probable that Cooper’s
decision will be appealed by the Department
of Justice.
Copies of the decision
in U.S. vs. AMC may be obtained from Mary Ann Grasso
at NATO’s California headquarters. 
