Burns-Vidlak

Burns-Vidlak v. Chandler

Good Law
165 F.3d 1257
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 22, 1999No. 97-16329California1,702 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Beezer, J.

Susan Chandler, in her official capacity as the director of the Department of Human Services of the State of Hawaii, and the State of Hawaii [collectively hereinafter “the State”] appeal the denial of their motion for partial summary judgment on the question whether punitive damages are available *1259 against a state under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 (1994) [hereinafter “Title II”], and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (1994) [hereinafter “Section 504”]. We dismiss this appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

I

This suit involves a challenge under Title II and Section 504 to Hawaii’s QUEST 1 health care program. Burns-Vidlak claims that the categorical exclusion of blind and disabled persons from participation in the QUEST program prior to April 1, 1996 constituted unlawful discrimination in violation of Title II and Section 504. Burns-Vidlak originally filed this action solely against Susan Chandler, in her official capacity as the director of Hawaii’s Department of Human Services. See Burns-Vidlak, 939 F.Supp. at 766. The district court granted partial summary judgment in favor of Burns-Vidlak, holding, as a…

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.