419 F. App'x 381
4th Cir.2011Background
- Plaintiffs are three deaf or hard-of-hearing Maryland residents who attend Redskins games at FedEx Field and rely on auxiliary aids; FedEx Field installed captioning for some public address content in 2006 after plaintiffs filed suit; the district court held the case not moot and granted summary judgment for plaintiffs on ADA access to public address content including lyrics; defendants captioned substantial public address and concourse content but not lyrics or Red Zebra radio program; plaintiffs sought full and equal access to all aural content broadcast over the public address system, including lyrics; the district court found captioning of lyrics would be feasible and not unduly burdensome; the district court ordered continued captioning and email delivery of lyrics prior to games; the case involves whether the ADA requires auxiliary aids beyond hearing devices to provide access to game-related information, emergency information, and entertainment lyrics.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the case is moot given defendants’ voluntary captioning. | Feldman argues live controversy remains over lyrics and Red Zebra. | Defendants argue continued captioning shows no recurrence of ADA violations. | Not moot; live dispute remains including lyrics. |
| Scope of the complaint—does it cover lyrics and Red Zebra program? | Complaint refers to announcements over the public address system; lyrics within scope. | Lyrics and Red Zebra were not expressly pled; ambiguity. | Lyrics within scope; Red Zebra outside scope. |
| Whether the ADA requires auxiliary aids for all aural content on FedEx Field’s public address system | Full and equal enjoyment requires access to game information, lyrics, and broadcasts. | Auxiliary aids must be provided only to the extent necessary for effective communication. | Yes; auxiliary aids required for broad aural content, including lyrics. |
| Appropriate standard for auxiliary aids under ADA in this context | Three-pronged approach supports providing lyrics captions as necessary for effective communication. | Auxiliary aids must be determined by effectiveness and feasibility. | Court endorses flexible, context-sensitive auxiliary aids focus on effective communication. |
| Whether the Red Zebra radio program claim was tried by consent and thus proper on appeal | If treated as pleaded or impliedly consented, captioning could be considered. | Radio program claim not pled and not properly tried. | Red Zebra claim outside scope; not preserved for summary judgment; not decided on merits. |
Key Cases Cited
- Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969) (case mootness standards; live controversy requirement)
- United States v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388 (1980) (requisite personal interest must persist throughout litigation)
- United States v. Jones, 136 F.3d 342 (4th Cir.1998) (voluntary cessation not necessarily moot)
- Lyons P’Ship, L.P. v. Morris Costumes, Inc., 243 F.3d 789 (4th Cir.2001) (heavy burden to show recurrence of wrong; mootness exception)
- Incumaa v. Ozmint, 507 F.3d 281 (4th Cir.2007) (live dispute; control over captioning considerations)
- Ramer v. Saxbe, 522 F.2d 695 (D.C.Cir.1975) (case not moot if any claim remains viable)
- Doughney v. Doughney, 263 F.3d 359 (4th Cir.2001) (implied consent at summary judgment stage; pleaded issues)