University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name Lane v. Santa Cruz Metro. Transit District DR-CA-0028
Docket / Court 5:02-cv-01808-RMW ( N.D. Cal. )
State/Territory California
Case Type(s) Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Attorney Organization Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center
Case Summary
On April 16, 2002, plaintiffs, Santa Cruz residents who suffered various forms of blindness, filed a complaint against the state transit agency in the United States District Court for the District of Northern California for violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § ... read more >
On April 16, 2002, plaintiffs, Santa Cruz residents who suffered various forms of blindness, filed a complaint against the state transit agency in the United States District Court for the District of Northern California for violations of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12131, et seq.; (2) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701, et seq. and various state laws. Plaintiffs sought injunctive and monetary relief.

Plaintiffs claim that the defendant failed to implement systems to announce at which stop a bus was stopping and, for individuals waiting at a bus stop, to announce which bus had arrived. Thus, the plaintiffs alleged they had missed stops and taken the wrong bus. The plaintiffs alleged the defendant had been aware of its inaccessible bus system since at least 1989 and that bus drivers were not helpful and lacked training.

On July 11, 2003, the parties entered into a settlement agreement and filed it with the court. The defendant agreed to install "talking technology" equipment to announce bus stops, ensure discipline of drivers who did not comply with the changes, and pay for an outside agency to monitor compliance by riding buses for at least 100 hours per quarter. The agreement was to last two years from the date on which the last bus was fitted with the talking technology. The defendant also agreed to pay $5000 to each plaintiff and $135,000 in attorneys' fees and costs.

On July 22, 2003, the court dismissed the case by stipulation.

Eric Weiler - 05/27/2010


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Plaintiff Type
Private Plaintiff
Causes of Action State law
Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.
Defendant(s) State public transportation agency
Plaintiff Description Two blind individuals riding public bus system
Indexed Lawyer Organizations Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center
Class action status sought No
Class action status granted No
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer Yes
Nature of Relief Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 2003 - 2005
Case Closing Year 2003
Case Ongoing No
Docket(s)
5:02-cv-01808-RMW (N.D. Cal.) 07/22/2003
DR-CA-0028-9000 PDF | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Complaint 04/16/2002
DR-CA-0028-0001 PDF | Detail
First Amended Complaint 06/13/2002
DR-CA-0028-0002 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendant Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' 6th Claim For Relief For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief May Be Granted [F.R.C.P. §12(b)(6)] 07/03/2002
DR-CA-0028-0003 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Plaintiffs' Memorandum In Opposition To Defendant Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' 6th Claim For Relief For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief May Be Granted 09/26/2002
DR-CA-0028-0004 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendant Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District's Reply Brief In Support Of Its Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' 6th Claim For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief May Be Granted [F.R.C.P. §12(b)(6)] 10/04/2002
DR-CA-0028-0005 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Order Granting Defendant's Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs' 6th Claim For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief May Be Granted 11/07/2002 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0028-0006 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Defendant Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District's Answer To First Amended Complaint 11/25/2002
DR-CA-0028-0007 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Settlement Agreement and Release 06/09/2003
DR-CA-0028-0009 PDF | Detail
Order of Dismissal 07/22/2003 (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0028-0008 PDF | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Lloyd, Howard R. (N.D. Cal.) [Magistrate]
DR-CA-0028-9000
Whyte, Ronald M. (N.D. Cal.)
DR-CA-0028-0006 | DR-CA-0028-0008 | DR-CA-0028-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Fox, Timothy Patrick (Colorado)
DR-CA-0028-0001 | DR-CA-0028-0002 | DR-CA-0028-0004 | DR-CA-0028-0009 | DR-CA-0028-9000
Kilb, Linda D. (California)
DR-CA-0028-0001 | DR-CA-0028-0002 | DR-CA-0028-0004 | DR-CA-0028-0009 | DR-CA-0028-9000
Defendant's Lawyers Shureen, Donald Douglas (California)
DR-CA-0028-0003 | DR-CA-0028-0005 | DR-CA-0028-0007 | DR-CA-0028-0009 | DR-CA-0028-9000
Smith, Ted Aubrey Vincett (California)
DR-CA-0028-9000
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -