Coda lawyer to represent DeafBlind client before Supreme Court
Andrew Rozynski, a Coda attorney who has a reputation for winning civil rights and discrimination cases for deaf clients with his New York City law firm Eisenberg & Baum, will represent a deaf and low-vision woman from Texas, Jane Cummings, in a case before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether victims of discrimination can be compensated for emotional distress.
It is Rozynski’s first time arguing a case before the Supreme Court. Oral arguments are scheduled for Tuesday, November 30th. The arguments cannot be filmed or photographed, but there will be an audio recording and a transcript available.
The question before the Supreme Court is whether victims of discrimination from businesses or organizations that receive federal funding are eligible for compensatory (monetary) damages based on emotional distress.
What is the case about? In 2018, Cummings, who had back pain, was referred to Premier Rehab Keller (PRK) in Fort Worth, Texas. Cummings called PRK at least three times to request an ASL interpreter, but was denied each time. PRK would only offer pen and paper or for Cummings to bring her own interpreter. Cummings ended up going to another medical clinic.
Cummings then worked with Rozynski to file a federal lawsuit against PRK. Cummings wanted to get compensatory damages for experiencing humiliation, frustration, and emotional distress.
PRK receives federal funding because it is a recipient of Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements. Because PRK receives federal funding, they are required by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability.
I will continue to explain the case after advertisements from our sponsors.
[Sponsored Video from Convo: https://www.convorelay.com/download ]
[Advertisement] New York Deaf Theatre is hiring for two positions, see below to apply! Part-Time Executive Director - https://bit.ly/3cjR2JI Part-Time Development Director - https://bit.ly/3Cprmpo ]
The Cummings lawsuit was filed in a district court in Texas. Cummings alleged that PRK violated Section 504 and anti-discrimination protections in the Affordable Care Act.
The district court judge dismissed the case, saying organizations that receive federal funding wouldn’t be able to know, predict or realize that they were causing emotional damage.
Cummings appealed.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, affirmed the district court’s opinion.
The Fifth Circuit’s decision came in conflict with a previous decision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, which is a separate court but equal in authority.
The Eleventh Circuit Court covers Florida, Alabama, and Georgia. In 2007, the Eleventh Circuit heard a case about a blind woman who was not allowed to bring her service dog into a medical clinic to be with her teenager son, who was undergoing an MRI. The 11th Circuit found said the medical facility engaged in discrimination and was liable for emotional distress damages.
So, we see that there is a conflict between the Fifth Circuit and the Eleventh Circuit. There is only one way to solve a conflict between federal appeals courts — the Supreme Court.
The current Solicitor General of the U.S. Elizabeth Prelogar, who represents the federal government before the Supreme Court, wrote an amicus curiae (friend of the court) filing to support Rozynski’s petition for the Supreme Court to review this case. The Supreme Court granted a hearing.
PRK said in a filing to the Supreme Court that it is unfair to be held liable for emotional distress over three telephone calls.
The National Association of the Deaf (NAD) and several other disability and civil rights organizations submitted amicus briefs for Cummings.
The ACLU said the Supreme Court’s answer to the question about compensatory damages for emotional distress will affect the availability of emotional distress damages in cases of race discrimination and sex discrimination.
TheWellNews.com explained that the kind of damages that normally come with a civil rights violation is physical injury, property damage, or loss of income, but now this case may expand it to allow damages for emotional distress alone.
So, this is a Coda lawyer representing a DeafBlind client in a case before the Supreme Court on November 30. We’ll keep you updated on the case.
https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/cummings-v-premier-rehab-keller-p-l-l-c/
https://www.theusconstitution.org/litigation/cummings-v-premier-rehab-keller-p-l-l-c/
https://www.aclu.org/cases/cummings-v-premier-rehab-keller-pllc-no-20-219
https://www.upi.com/Top_News/2007/10/30/Court-rules-firm-mistreated-blind-woman/35261193773795/