Lopez v. Jet Blue Airways
662 F.3d 593
2d Cir.2011Background
- Lopez, a disabled individual requiring wheelchair assistance, sues JetBlue for alleged disability discrimination on two July 2009 flights and return transport.
- DOT investigation concluded JetBlue violated one regulation on July 3, 2009; no determination on July 10, 2009.
- District Court granted Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal, ruling Lopez failed to state a claim under the ACAA or ADA.
- Court reviews de novo and applies liberal pro se pleading standard for dismissal determinations.
- Court addresses whether ACAA provides a private right of action and whether ADA Title III can reach air carriers in airport-terminal services.
- ADA analysis considers whether alleged discrimination fell under specified public transportation services or a place of public accommodation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does ACAA provide a private right of action? | Lopez argues for private enforcement of ACAA rights. | JetBlue contends no private right exists under ACAA; enforcement is administrative. | No private right of action under ACAA. |
| Can ADA Title III impose liability on air carriers for airport-terminal services? | Lopez asserts Title III coverage for disability discrimination in terminal-based services. | JetBlue argues terminals used for air travel are not public accommodations under Title III. | Air carrier not liable under Title III for terminal services primarily facilitating air travel. |
| Are the alleged acts actionable under § 12184 or § 12182? | Lopez seeks relief for discrimination in transportation services or public accommodations. | JetBlue’s conduct falls outside the scope of specified public transportation services and public accommodations. | No claim under § 12184 or § 12182; not within Title III. |
Key Cases Cited
- Alexander v. Sandoval, 532 U.S. 275 (2001) (implied private rights require clear congressional intent)
- Love v. Delta Air Lines, 310 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2002) (no private right of action under ACAA post-Sandoval)
- Boswell v. SkyWest Airlines, Inc., 361 F.3d 1263 (10th Cir. 2004) (no private right of action under ACAA)
- Shinault v. American Airlines, Inc., 936 F.2d 796 (5th Cir. 1991) (reliance on legislative history for implied rights pre-Sandoval)
- Ruta v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 322 F.Supp.2d 391 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (no private right of action under ACAA after Sandoval)
- Tallarico v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 881 F.2d 566 (8th Cir. 1989) (prior reliance on legislative history for implied rights)