D'Lil

D'Lil v. Anaheim Hotel Partnership

Good Law
43 F. App'x 96
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 30, 2002No. 01-56547; D.C. No. CV-99-09286-GAFCalifornia687 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Hollynn D’Lil appeals the district court’s partial grant of summary judgment for the Anaheim Hilton & Towers Hotel as to whether the hotel is required to install roll-in showers under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-12189 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand. As the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of the case, we will not repeat them here except as necessary. We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. Botosan v. Paul McNally Realty, 216 F.3d 827, 830 (9th Cir.2000).

The ADA requires the Anaheim Hilton to install roll-in showers in fifteen 1 of its 1,572 rooms only if the hotel’s current lack of roll-in showers (1) constitutes an “architectural barrier” (2) whose removal is “readily achievable.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182 (b)(2)(A)(iv). The district court based its partial grant of summary judgment on the conclusion that there was no architectural barrier. However, it is undisputed that the lack of rooms with roll-in showers at the Anaheim Hilton makes it impossible for D’Lil to utilize an essential element of the hotel room — namely, the bathing facilities.…

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.