A lawsuit filed by two women who are confined to wheelchairs alleges that the Genius Bar at Apple’s San Francisco retail store is in violation of federal accessibility laws. Jana Overbo and Nichole Brown-Booker said in the lawsuit that they visited the two story store and found several access issues: elevator buttons and products were out of reach, there was no wheelchair space in the theater, and a too-high Genius Bar prevented the staff from seeing the women or allowing the women to interact during their appointment. The women also noted that the store’s staff, who didn’t offer them assistance. As with other lawsuits filed under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), the women asked in the lawsuit that the accessibility issues be corrected, and also for compensation for their emotional and physical losses.
The lawsuit was filed by attorneys for the Paul L. Rien law firm in Oakland (Calif.), which specializes in disability rights issues. The lawsuit is unlike the many class-action lawsuits filed against Apple, since it involves just two specific plaintiffs. The class-actions are usually filed by representative plaintiffs, who then solicit others who are affected to join the lawsuit.
The lawsuit is also different from many other ADA lawsuits that have been filed across the country under the ADA, so-called “drive-through” lawsuits generated by attorneys seeking to generate revenue and not remedies. The ADA allows lawsuits to be filed even if there is no specific victim or actual damages. That provision has generated hundreds of lawsuits, filed by attorneys and plaintiffs who have only driven past the defendant business, but who have never actually visited the interior of the building. Many businesses have chosen to settle for moderate amounts of money rather than fight the lawsuit, and then to also fix the accessibility issues.
In this case, both Overbo and Brown-Booker state in the lawsuit they are Apple product users and intend to return to the San Francisco store when the accessibility issues are remedied.
The court’s scheduling order in the case notes that both parties will hold joint inspections of the premises by December 3rd, and then have until December 13th to hold meet-and-confer sessions to discuss a settlement. If the parties cannot reach an agreement, they must then file a mediation notice with the court 45 days after the site inspection.
Some original store configurations include specific access for those in wheelchairs, including a pull-out shelf at the end of the old-style Corian Genius Bar.
Download (pdf) the women’s lawsuit filing.
Apple’s individual retail store Web pages have at least two standard paragraphs that are sometimes displayed about “special needs,” both saying the company is “committed” to providing assistance, and asking such customers to give the store “reasonable advance notice.”
E-mail this story
Related posts:
Loading ...
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
Did Jana Overbo and Nichole Brown-Booker make an attempt to bring their concerns to Apple prior to seeking litigation?
As one who has a family member with a debilitating disability, I can understand the need for access. I have visited the Apple Store in San Francisco and found the store and its staff to be more than hospitable and adaptive to people’s needs.
In this particular case I find it doubtful these two litigants want anything more than to extort some sort of cash settlement out of Apple.
ADA requirements clearly specify elevator operation critique. As for access to the Genius Bar all one has to do is ask.
Unfortunately, we find in life plenty of people who will complain just about almost anything, if given the opportunity. In the end, those who hope to benefit from such actions will be the attorneys representing the complaining parties as they are more than happy to drive the cost of doing business; impacting the consumer in the end.
So I ask again, if the litigants and their law firm are truly interested in seeking the betterment of mankind, why didn’t they just ask?
[IFO -- Good question. While a federal law, violations of the ADA are not sought out by any federal agency for enforcement. Instead, the ADA specifically uses the private lawsuit process to provide enforcement, which then formally brings together the two parties for discussion on remedies. As for your other points, I repeat that this lawsuit does not appear to fall into the common categories of legal action: a class-action lawsuit with a representative, and not actual, victim, or a sham ADA action intended only to generate money for the attorneys.]
As a person who takes part in the construction of buildings both residential and commercial, let me weigh in here. Let me start with the elevator issue. Generally speaking control buttons, light switches, thermostats and the like are required to be within 48 inches of the floor. I would be highly surprised if the job would get past inspection if the elevator controls were higher than 48 inches. BTW wall mounted electrical receptacles are required to be no lower than 15 from the floor (when measured to the center of the outlet). The Genius Bar, from pictures that I have seen have a lowered section at each end (as does the bar at The Grove in LA) to allow a person in a wheelchair be served. Out of fairness to the ladies, in the picture that I saw there was a small display with copies of OS X for sale right in the middle of the wheelchair section of the bar. Fix this one Apple. I’m a licensed electrical contractor in Calif.
Its sad that out of all the litigation that goes on in the US 2 ladies with disabilities get on the band wagon. What is society coming too? Like Brad said all they had to do is ask. Just because your special needs doesn’t mean that everyone is going to come over and wait on you hand and foot.
Gary and I can attest that we have seen our friend Matt(who has been wheelchair bound most of his life) from Scottland use the SF store for purpose of purchase, and amusement and have yet to hear from him that they do not meet his requirements.
I really wonder when these 2 went to the store. The staff is always willing to assist folks with questions.
I work at a store and I will say this,
We try to help out everybody with disabilities whenever we can.
I admit that we don’t go out of our way to help. If I don’t see them looking like they need help I don’t go out of my way for them. I treat them like everybody else. Just because you are there at the store, it doesn’t mean that you need help. Some people like to just wander around and try out stuff and see what is around. Some people feel they don’t want a “pushy” salesperson asking if they need help. Some people with disabilities don’t want people giving them more attention than a “normal” person. They want people to treat them like a regular customer. They get more upset when people give them special treatment. We have complete access for wheelchairs and yeah some stuff is high up, hell, it is high up for anybody but the tallest. I sometimes have to ask customers to reach stuff for me. Doesn’t mean I am going to sue!!!
Many of the newer store designs with wood Genius/Studio bars have slide-out wheelchair access. (I say “many” because every store I’m familiar with has them, and while the bar at this San Francisco store appears to be the same style from the photos, I’ve not been there myself.)
Both ends of the San Francisco Genius Bar are handicap accesible. The part closest to the theater can be extended out for just such a purpose. The other end of the bar has a wheelchair level table that has an iMac for signing up for the bar. You can invariably walk into the store and see both ends of the bar being used for ProCare and bar sessions concurrently. The SF store theater also has two wide access points on either side, enough for four wheelchairs on each side. Apple also offers a free service called Personal Shopping which could have addressed these ladies’ height concerns about product accessibility. No amount of disability access can avoid one’s inability to ask for further assistance. Clearly contacting an attorney wasn’t quite so difficult with a telephone.