University of Michigan Law School
Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse
new search
page permalink
Case Name United States v. Law School Admissions Council DR-PA-0007
Docket / Court 2:99-cv-06209-JP ( E.D. Pa. )
State/Territory Pennsylvania
Case Type(s) Disability Rights-Pub. Accom.
Attorney Organization U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
Case Summary
On December 6, 1999, the Disability Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC), the company that administers the Law School ... read more >
On December 6, 1999, the Disability Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against the Law School Admissions Council (LSAC), the company that administers the Law School Admission Test (LSAT), under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12189 and its implementing regulation, 28 C.F.R. § 36.309. The plaintiff alleged that LSAC demanded excessive documentation from individuals who were visually impaired and had other physical disabilities who requested accommodations on the LSAT in violation of the ADA and its implementing regulations.

On August 7, 2001, the District Court (Judge John P. Podova) rejected a motion by a third-party plaintiff with a disability to intervene in the lawsuit. The Court rejected the motion because it held that plaintiff's motion was untimely; would introduce issues unrelated to the current litigation as the third-plaintiff alleged causes of action under privacy law, the Civil Rights Act and the Rehabilitation Act, named a new defendant (a law school that had denied the third-party plaintiff admissions), and involved a mental disability when this case has been limited to physical disabilities; and the United States, as the government entity vested with the power to enforce Title III would adequately represent the third party plaintiff's interests. United States v. Law School Admission Council 2001 WL 1175141 (E.D. Pa. 2001). The ruling was affirmed on August 27, 2002 with no written opinion by the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. United States v. Law School Admission Council 48 Fed. Appx. 41 (3d Cir. 2002).

On February 22, 2002, the United States and LSAC entered into a five-year settlement agreement. The settlement, which was limited to individual candidates for accommodations that had physical disabilities, required:
  • LSAC was to its document request requirements for individuals with physical disabilities to documents necessary to determine if the individual had a disability, how that disability effected the individuals ability to take the LSAT, and assess the individual's need for accommodations.

  • LSAC would be required to conduct an individualized assessment on individuals' requests for accommodations.

  • LSAC would be required to grant accommodations to all individuals who submit accurate documentation of a disability and that they have received similar accommodations on similar admissions tests.

  • LSAC was required to provide the accommodation of extra breaks to candidates who qualified for that accommodation

  • LSAC was required to notify an applicant for accommodations when his or her application would not support the accommodations he or she was requesting and ask for supplemental documentation that would allow LSAC to grant the application.

  • LSAC was generally banned from requiring tests that were not generally used by the medical community.

  • LSAC was required to provide a clear, written explanation for its decision to deny accommodations and inform a candidate for accommodations of their right to appeal the determination.

  • LSAC was required to submit an application to an expert when it lacked the expertise to determine whether an individual qualified for the requested accommodations.

  • LSAC agreed to adopt forms negotiated and approved by both parties (though the United States refused to endorse the forms request for percentile rankings).

  • LSAC agreed to pay the United States Department of Justice $20,000.

  • LSAC agreed to provide reports of requests for accommodations for the term of the settlement agreement.

  • LSAC agreed to allow the United States to monitor its compliance with the settlement agreement.


The term of the settlement agreement expired in 2007 and thus the case is closed.

Brian Kempfer - 06/08/2014


compress summary

- click to show/hide ALL -
Issues and Causes of Action
click to show/hide detail
Issues
Content of Injunction
Develop anti-discrimination policy
Monitoring
Reasonable Accommodation
Recordkeeping
Reporting
Retaliation Prohibition
Disability
disability, unspecified
Hearing impairment
Mobility impairment
Visual impairment
Discrimination-area
Testing
General
Access to public accommodations - privately owned
Education
Pattern or Practice
Reasonable Accommodations
Reasonable Modifications
Test or device
Testing
Plaintiff Type
U.S. Dept of Justice plaintiff
Type of Facility
Non-government non-profit
Causes of Action Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.
Defendant(s) Law School Admission Council
Plaintiff Description Disability Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of several individual physically disabled applicants to law school
Indexed Lawyer Organizations U.S. Dept. of Justice Civil Rights Division
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 Private Settlement Agreement
Order Duration 2002 - 2007
Case Closing Year 2007
Case Ongoing No
Docket(s)
2:99-cv-06209 (E.D. Pa.) 02/06/2003
DR-PA-0007-9000.pdf | Detail
PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
General Documents
Order-Memorandum [Ruling on Request of Thomas Scherer as 3rd Party to Intervene] 08/07/2001 (2001 WL 1175141) (E.D. Pa.)
DR-PA-0007-0002.pdf | WESTLAW | Detail
Document Source: Westlaw
Settlement Agreement 02/22/2002
DR-PA-0007-0001.pdf | Detail
Document Source: PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]
Judges Padova, John R. (E.D. Pa.)
DR-PA-0007-0002 | DR-PA-0007-9000
Monitors/Masters None on record
Plaintiff's Lawyers Delaney, Sheila K. (District of Columbia)
DR-PA-0007-0001 | DR-PA-0007-9000
Einstein, Laura F. (District of Columbia)
DR-PA-0007-0001 | DR-PA-0007-9000
Griffin, Nancy L. (Pennsylvania)
DR-PA-0007-9000
Gugin, Patricia D (Washington)
DR-PA-0007-9000
Maisels, Amanda (District of Columbia)
DR-PA-0007-0001 | DR-PA-0007-9000
Nichol, Allison (District of Columbia)
DR-PA-0007-0001
Stiles, Michael R. (Pennsylvania)
DR-PA-0007-9000
Wodatch, John L. (District of Columbia)
DR-PA-0007-0001
Defendant's Lawyers Burgoyne, Robert Anthony (District of Columbia)
DR-PA-0007-9000
Van Tol, Joan E. (Pennsylvania)
DR-PA-0007-0001
Other Lawyers None on record

- click to show/hide ALL -

new search
page permalink

- top of page -