By: Derek Hawkins//December 3, 2018//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: Mycal L. Ashby v. Warrick County School Corporation
Case No.: 18-1371
Officials: RIPPLE, KANNE, and BRENNAN, Circuit Judges.
Focus: Statutory Interpretation – ADA Violation
Mycal Ashby’s son was a member of his elementary school choir for several years. In both 2014 and 2015, the choir agreed to perform a Christmas concert at a local history museum. The museum is located in a historic building and, at the time of both concerts, was not accessible to persons with disabilities. Ms. Ashby, who uses a wheelchair, therefore was unable, in both years, to attend the Christmas concert and to see her son and his schoolmates sing. She consequently brought this action against the Warrick County School Corporation, alleging discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Rehabilitation Act.
The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment. Focusing on the language of the statute and implementing regulation, the district court concluded that the Christmas concert was not a “service, program, or activity of” the Warrick Schools. Nor was the concert an activity “provided or made available” by the School Corporation. 28 C.F.R. § 35.102. It therefore granted Warrick Schools’ motion for summary judgment. Ms. Ashby appealed.
Because resolution of the appeal turns on the proper interpretation and application of statutory and regulatory language on which we have little precedent, we invited the Department of Justice, the agency charged with the administration of the statute, to submit a brief as amicus curiae. The Department accepted our invitation and submitted a brief. The Government notes that when a public entity offers a program in conjunction with a private entity, the question whether a service, program, or activity is one “of” a public entity is a complicated, fact-based one. The Government’s brief suggests that there is a “spectrum” of possible relationships ranging from a “true joint endeavor” on one end to participation in a wholly private event on the other.3 The Department’s interpretation of its regulations is a reasonable one that offers a loose but practical framework that aids in decision-making.
Upon close examination of the record, it is clear to us that the district court correctly determined that the event in question was not a service, program, or activity provided or made available by the Warrick County School Corporation. Accordingly, its judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed