Toledo-Colon v. Puerto Rico
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107375
D.P.R.2011Background
- Plaintiff Edwin Toledo-Colon sues the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, DOL, DOJ, and VRA (and certain individuals) under ADA Title II, Rehabilitation Act, Law 44, Law 115, and Puerto Rico Civil Code claims.
- Defendants moved to dismiss under 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6); co-defendants joined later; Plaintiff opposed.
- VRA administers Puerto Rico’s Vocational Rehabilitation Program; Plaintiff, a student with a disability, received VRA services and requested assistive equipment on multiple occasions.
- Plaintiff asserts denied equipment/ services due to discrimination; key denials occurred 2003, 2008, and related actions; meetings and administrative proceedings followed.
- OPPI issued a November 5, 2009 resolution deeming the issue moot because Plaintiff was pursuing a master’s degree; Plaintiff filed suit December 14, 2010.
- The court grants in part and denies in part the motions to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there is individual liability under Title II ADA, Rehab Act, and Law 44. | Plaintiff seeks damages against individuals. | No individual liability under these statutes. | Individual liability is unavailable; claims against individual defendants dismissed. |
| Eleventh Amendment and Section 1983 damages vs injunctive relief. | Eleventh Amendment does not bar official-capacity suits for injunctive relief. | Damages barred against state entities and officials in official capacity; injunctive relief allowed. | Monetary damages against Commonwealth, DOJ, DOL, VRA, and officials in official capacity are dismissed; injunctive relief and personal-capacity claims survive. |
| Timeliness of §1983/ADA/Rehabilitation Act/Law 44 claims and continuing violation. | Continuing violation tolls the limitations period. | One-year limitations apply; continuing violation doctrine not applicable. | Claims time-barred for acts before 2009; continuing violation doctrine rejected. |
| Failure to state a claim under ADA Title II. | Discrimination occurred when equipment was denied. | Complaint lacks facts showing denial was due to disability. | Title II ADA claim dismissed for failure to allege causation/ discrimination. |
| Claims against DOJ and DOL. | DOJ/DOL are proper parties to represent or supervise VRA. | DOJ lacks factual basis; DOL may oversee VRA but claims insufficient. | DOJ claims dismissed; DOL claims retained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Parker v. Univ. de Puerto Rico, 225 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2000) (Title II/504 liability framework for ADA and Rehab Act)
- Tobin v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 553 F.3d 121 (1st Cir. 2009) (Continuing violation not applicable to discrete acts)
- Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908) (Official-capacity suits for prospective relief allowed)
- Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (1989) (Official-capacity suits treated as against the state; injunctive relief permitted)
- Hafer v. Melo, 502 U.S. 21 (1991) (State officials liable in damages only in personal capacity)
- Rodriguez-Garcia v. Miranda-Marin, 610 F.3d 756 (1st Cir. 2010) (Res judicata/collateral estoppel standards applied)