Richard Hunt, Esq. is a Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer with more than 35 years of experience. He specializes in defending businesses who are sued under the accessibility provisions of the ADA and FHA, as well as prosecuting claims on behalf of businesses offering services to the disabled, with clients ranging from national multi-family developers and property managers to local mom-and-pop retail outlets. His blog at accessdefense.com is read by thousands of individuals and businesses seeking information on ADA and FHA claims. He speaks nationally on ADA and FHA litigation matters and has conducted dozens of seminars and webinars on these subjects for groups like the International Council of Shopping Centers, the National Retail Tenants Association, the CSUN Accessibility Conference, and the Texas Apartment Association. He has been interviewed on accessibility litigation issues by Forbes, The Economist as well as other national and local publications.
Robles v Domino’s: What the Domino’s Appeal to the Supreme Court Means for Website Accessibility Litigation
CLE Credits earned: 1 GENERAL (or 1 LAW & LEGAL for WA state)
Domino’s pending request for a writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court might be pointing the way to a revolution in website accessibility litigation. This webinar explains what the case is about, why the lower court decisions were important, why the writ is unlikely to be granted, and why the case will still have an important impact on future cases.
Key topics to be discussed:
• Why ADA website accessibility litigation is a big deal
• The legal issues driving website litigation in federal and state courts
• Where Domino’s v. Robles fits in the larger picture of website accessibility litigation
• Why the requested writ probably won’t be granted, and why the case is still important for business owners with websites and their lawyers
Date / Time: November 11, 2019
• 2:00 pm – 3:00 pm Eastern
• 1:00 pm – 2:00 pm Central
• 12:00 pm – 1:00 pm Mountain
• 11:00 am – 12:00 pm Pacific
Choose a format:
• Live Video Broadcast/Re-Broadcast: Watch Program “live” in real-time, must sign-in and watch program on date and time set above. May ask questions during presentation via chat box. Qualifies for “live” CLE credit.
• On-Demand Video: Access CLE 24/7 via on-demand library and watch program anytime. Qualifies for self-study CLE credit. On-demand versions are made available 7 business days after the original recording date and are view-able for up to one year.
myLawCLE seeks accreditation for all programs in all states. (Accreditation for paralegals sought thru NALA and NFPA paralegal associations.) Each attending attorney/paralegal will receive a certificate of completion following the close of the CLE program as proof of attendance. In required states, myLawCLE records attorney/paralegals attendance, in all other states attorney/paralegal is provided with the approved CLE certificate to submit to their state bar or governing association.
- Automatic MCLE Approvals
All myLawCLE CLE programs are accredited automatically either directly or via reciprocity in the following states: AK, AR, CA, CT, FL, HI, ME, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, NJ, NY, WV, and VT. (AZ does not approve CLE programs, but accepts our certificates for CLE credit.)
- Live Video Broadcasts
Live video broadcasts are new live CLE programs being streamed and recorded for the first time. All of these programs qualify for “Live” CLE credit in all states except NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, SC, and LA —these states require in-person attendance to qualify for “Live” CLE credit.
- “Live” Re-Broadcasts
“Live” Re-broadcasts are replays of previous recorded CLE programs, set on a specific date and time and where the original presenting speakers calls in live at the end of the event to answer questions. This “live” element allows for “live” Re-broadcast CLEs to qualify for “Live” CLE credits in most states. [The following states DO NOT allow for “live” CLE credits on re-broadcast CLEs: NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, SC, and LA]
Many states allow for credit to be granted on a 1:1 reciprocal basis for courses approved in another mandatory CLE jurisdiction state. This is known as a reciprocity provision and includes the following states: AK, AR, HI, CT, FL, ME, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, VT, NJ, NY, and WV. myLawCLE does not seek direct accreditation of live webinars or teleconferences in these states.
Section I. How we got here – a brief history of website accessibility litigation
Section II. The dominant legal issues in website accessibility litigation
Section III. The dominant practical issues that drive most outcomes
Section IV. Domino’s v Robles, lower court rulings and the pending application
Section V. Where we’re going next, no matter what the Supreme Court does