Segways Aren't Essential at Disney Parks; Judge Tosses Pact

Plaintiffs in a suit over Walt Disney World's ban on Segways have failed to show that the motorized devices are necessary to move around in the theme parks, a federal judge has found, denying final approval of a settlement reached earlier this year.

U.S. District Judge Gregory A. Presnell of the Middle District of Florida granted preliminary approval of the settlement in January.

However, after a June fairness hearing at which more than 100 people objected to the pact, he determined that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the suit.

To sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act, plaintiffs must show that the law specifically prohibits the discrimination they allegedly face, the judge said.

The ADA section on which the plaintiffs based their claims says people are discriminated against when a public entity has not made reasonable modifications that are necessary for access. An ADA claim under that section cannot be maintained, Judge Presnell said, unless the proposed modification is essential for access.

He said the plaintiffs failed to show that Segways are essential to their mobility in and enjoyment of the Disney parks because wheelchairs and scooters are already available.

"Although some individuals may, with good reason, not want to use those devices and instead prefer to use a Segway," Judge Presnell said, "that preference - standing alone - is not essential to accessing Disney's parks."

The judge vacated his order granting preliminary approval of the settlement and dismissed the plaintiffs' second amended complaint.

Three plaintiffs filed the suit in November 2007, alleging that Disney violated the ADA by banning the use of Segways in its parks.

Disney had argued that the self-balancing electric transportation devices are difficult to control and are too unstable to be safe in the crowded parks.

Under the settlement Disney agreed to develop and offer for rent in its parks a four-wheeled electrically powered standup vehicle with hand controls similar in dimension and operation to a wheelchair and scooter.

The settlement maintained the ban on Segways.

At the June fairness hearing more than 100 people, disability-rights groups, the U.S. Department of Justice and 23 state attorneys general filed friend-of-the-court briefs and more than 200 pages of objections to the settlement.

The objectors said the ban and settlement discriminate against people with disabilities who prefer to move around upright rather than seated in a wheelchair.

The plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration asking Judge Presnell to approve the settlement.

They say he confused the question of standing with the merits of the case.

The necessity of Segways is not pertinent to the question of whether the plaintiffs have a right to challenge the legality of Disney's ban, they argue.

If the judge is correct that the plaintiffs could not succeed in their suit, they say, he should approve the settlement.

The plaintiffs say the agreement is in line with the goal Congress had when it enacted the ADA: integrating disabled people into the mainstream.

To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact West.Andrews.Editor@ThomsonReuters.com.

The plaintiffs are represented by John A. Baker and J. Phillip Krajewski of Baker, Baker & Krajewski in Springfield, Ill.; Bernard H. Dempsey Jr. of Dempsey & Associates in Winter Park, Fla.; and Jason M. Medley of O'Donnell, Ferebee, Medley & Keiser in Houston. Disney is represented by Kerry Alan Scanlon of Kaye Scholer in Washington.