Current Litigation

The following court cases are those in which the Law Center is currently representing some or all plaintiffs.

Bower v. Federal Express Corporation – This case was filed by various employees of Federal Express and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in the federal district court, Western District of Tennessee.  Our clients intervened in the case in 1997.  The case alleges that FedEx violated the ADA by excluding deaf and other disabled employees from participating in its jumpseat benefit – free flights to anywhere FedEx flies on its cargo plane jumpseats – without offering an alternative benefit such as a limited number of free flights on commercial airlines. As of early 2007, the case was settled 10 days before trial.  A consent decree is pending court approval.

Munoz v. Sacramento Area Council of Governments – This is a class action case filed in the federal district court, Northern District of California in 2005.  This case stems from our efforts to have all roadside call boxes in California equipped with TTYs.  The case was filed against nine local agencies called SAFEs that administer call boxes in various counties alleging violations of the ADA and other federal and state laws.  It was also filed against the CHP and Caltrans because those agencies are involved in the call box system and must approve local plans to install or modify call boxes.   As of early 2007, seven of the defendant SAFEs have agreed to install TTYs on their call boxes by July 2007, one by 2010 and the other 2011 and both CHP and Caltrans have agreed not to approve of local plans unless they include TTY or equivalent equipped call boxes.  The agreements are pending court approval.

Wilcox v. Watsonville Community Hospital – This case was filed in 2006 in the federal district court, Northern District of California.  It alleges the Hospital violated the ADA and other federal and state laws by refusing to provide sign language interpreters needed by the deaf plaintiff during the provision of medical care for his mother, for his daughter and for himself to assure effective communication.

Tessien v. City of Modesto – This case was filed in the federal district court, Central District California, in 2007.  This case alleges that the Modesto police violated the ADA, federal equal protection guarantees and state civil rights law as well as committing various torts when they stopped a deaf driver, shot out the rear window on his truck when he failed to respond to commands to get out of the truck and shot him numerous times with bean-bag guns when he did exit his vehicle in a case of mistaken identity.  We are seeking improvements in police policies and procedures when they interact with deaf citizens.