Roy O'Guinn v. Nevada Department of Correction

Good Law
468 F. App'x 651
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 14, 201210-17716California1,016 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Roy Alan O’Guinn appeals the grant of summary judgment against him on his Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Rehabilitation Act (“RA”) claims against the Nevada Department of Corrections and two of its officials (collectively, “NDOC”). We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and legal history of the case, we need not recount it here.

I

The district court correctly held that O’Guinn’s claims sounded in medical negligence, not discrimination under the ADA and RA. Both Title II of the ADA and § 504 of the RA “prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability.” Lovell v. Chandler, 303 F.3d 1039, 1052 (9th Cir.2002). It is well-settled that the ADA applies to state prisons. Pa. Dep’t of Corr. v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206 , 118 S.Ct. 1952 , 141 L.Ed.2d 215 (1998).

The ADA provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132 ; see also 29 U.S.C. § 794 . In order to establish a claim under the ADA and RA, a plaintiff…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.