1 andy dogali 2 pro hac vicedogali law group, p.a. andy dogali pro hac vice [email protected]...
TRANSCRIPT
Page1
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
[email protected],P.A.101E.KennedyBlvd.,Suite1100Tampa,Florida33602Tel: (813)289‐0700Fax: (813)289‐9435EUGENEFELDMANCaliforniaBarNo.118497gfeldmanlaw@att.netEugeneFeldman,AttorneyatLaw,APC555PierAvenue,Suite4HermosaBeach,CA90254Tel:(310)372‐4636Fax:(310)372‐4639AttorneysforPlaintiffs
UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTFORTHECENTRALDISTRICTOFCALIFORNIA
A.L.,andthroughD.L.,etal.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
WALTDISNEYPARKSANDRESORTSU.S.,INC.,
Defendant. /
CaseNo.:14‐cv‐3327
MEMORANDUMOFLAWINSUPPORTOFPLAINTIFFS’MOTIONFORLEAVETOFILEAMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINT
Hon.ManuelL.Real
Plaintiffs A.L., and others, through undersigned counsel and
pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local
RulesofthisCourt,andapplicablelaw,movetoamendtheircomplaintto
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 1 of 9 Page ID #:611
Page2
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
include additional new, similarly‐situated plaintiffs. In support of the
motionPlaintiffsprovidethefollowingmemorandum.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiffsbringanextensive complaintwhichgenerallyasserts that
in October of 2013 Defendant Walt Disney Parks and Resorts US, Inc.
(“Disney”) implemented a new accessibility system, ostensibly for the
purposeofaccommodatingdisabledpersonsinitsthemeparks.(Doc.1‐1‐
4). Plaintiffs allege that while the system, known as Disney's Disability
Access Service ("DAS"), might adequately accommodate persons with
certaindisabilities,itdoesentirelytheoppositeforpersonswithcognitive
impairments, such as persons with autism and similar disorders. For
persons with cognitive impairments, the DAS has not only made the
DisneyParksexperiencelessthanequal,ithasmadeitdownrightawful.
The existing Complaint includes 26 Plaintiffs, encompassing 14
families.Specifically,thePlaintiffsinclude16disabledindividualsthrough
theirguardians,and10oftheguardiansalsoseekreliefintheirindividual
capacities. Nine of the Guardian Plaintiffs are mothers of the Disabled
Plaintiffs; one is a grandmother. One of the Guardian Plaintiffs comes to
thisCourthavingalreadybeenappointedbyanothercourtastheplenary
legalguardianforherdisabledchild.Fortheothers,thisCourthasgranted
theirmotionstoactasguardianadlitem(Doc.17‐19,21‐29,30‐32).
After the initial Complaintwas filed, undersigned counsel received
an outpouring of phone calls and emails from victims and their families,
similarly situated to the 26 existing Plaintiffs. These communications
camefrompersonswhowerevictimsofthesamediscriminationofwhich
Plaintiffs complain; outrageous refusals to accommodate the needs of
certain disabled persons as a result of Disney’s DAS, at both the Walt
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 2 of 9 Page ID #:612
Page3
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
DisneyWorld Resort in Florida and the Disneyland Resort in California.
Most of the victims wanted to offer cheers of support and witness
assistance; somewere in search of counsel. Ultimately, the undersigned
counsel agreed to represent many of them. The existing Plaintiffs now
moveforleavetoaddmanyofthesimilarly‐situatedvictimsasPlaintiffsin
thepresentcase.Theproposedamendmentwouldadd69plaintiffstothe
action, encompassing 30 families. The new plaintiffs would include 36
disabledplaintiffsand33familymembers.
A copy of the proposed Amendment to Complaint is attached as
Exhibit1tothisMotion.
II. ARGUMENT
1. SummaryofArgument
In relevant part, Rule 15(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, provides, “a party may amend its pleading only with the
opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.The court should
freely give leave when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 15(a)(2)
(emphasis added). This policy is “to be appliedwith extreme liberality.”
Owensv.KaiserFound.HealthPlan,Inc.,244F.3d708,712(9thCir.2001)
(quotingMorongo Band ofMission Indians v. Rose, 893 F.2d 1074, 1079
(9th Cir. 1990)). In determining whether a motion to leave to amend
should be granted, Courts consider the following factors, as espousedby
theUnitedStatesSupremeCourt inFomanv.Davis,371U.S.178 (1962):
(1)undueprejudicetotheopposingparty;(2)unduedelay;(3)badfaith
ordilatorymotive;(4)futilityofamendment;and(5)whetherthemovant
haspreviouslyamendedapleading.Id.at183;SeeEminenceCapital,LLCv.
Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003); see also Daniels v.
CommunityLending,Inc.,2014WL1923229,at*2(S.D.Cal.May14,2014)
(“In determining whether to allow an amendment, a court considers
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 3 of 9 Page ID #:613
Page4
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
whether there is ‘undue delay,’ ‘bad faith,’ ‘undue prejudice to the
opposingparty,’or‘futilityofamendment.’”)Furthermore:
[n]ot all of the factors merit equal weight.As thiscircuitandothershaveheld, it is theconsiderationof prejudice to the opposing party that carries thegreatest weight…Absent prejudice, or a strongshowingofanyof the remainingFoman factors,there exists a presumption under Rule 15(a) infavorofgrantingleavetoamend.
EminenceCapital,316F.3dat1052(emphasisadded).
When weighed in the present case, the Foman factors support
grantingleavetoaddthenewplaintiffstothisactionbecause:theactionis
in the infantile stages of litigation; Disney faces no undue prejudice;
Plaintiffshavenotdelayedinbringingtheproposedamendment;Plaintiffs
havenot actedwithbad faithordilatorymotive; and, Plaintiffs havenot
previouslyamendedanypleadingsinthisaction.SeeMasonv.Pepsico,Inc.,
2011WL166258(C.D.Cal.2011).2. DisneyWillNotbePrejudiced
AccordingtotheNinthCircuit,“whiledistrictcourtsshouldconsider
allof the factorsdelineatedabove,onefactorcarriesthegreatestweight:
the consideration of prejudice to the opposing party.” Kohler v. Presidio
Intern., Inc. 2011WL 686060, at *1 (C.D. Cal. 2011); SeeDCDPrograms,
Ltd. v. Leighton, 833 F.2d 183,185 (9th Cir. 1987). Prejudice is the
“touchstoneof the inquiryunderrule15(a).”LoneStarLadies Inv.Clubv.
Schlotzsky’sInc.,238F.3d363,368(5thCir.2001);Howeyv.UnitedStates,
481F.2d1187,1190(9thCir.1973)(statingthat“thecrucialfactoristhe
resultingprejudicetotheopposingparty”).Absentprejudice,thereexists
a presumption under Rule 15(a) in favor of granting leave to amend.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 4 of 9 Page ID #:614
Page5
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Kohler,2011WL686060,at*1(alsostating“thispresumptionexistsinthe
absenceofastrongshowingofanyoftheremainingFormanfactors.”)
Moreover, as theNinth Circuit has stated, “[b]ald assertions of prejudice
cannot overcome the strong policy reflected inRule 15(a) to ‘facilitate a
proper disposition on the merits.’”Hurn v. Ret. Fund Trust of Plumbing,
Heating & Piping Indus. of S. California, 648 F.2d 1252, 1254 (9th Cir.
1981)(internalcitationsomitted).
Disneywouldfacenoundueprejudicewereleavetoamendgranted
because this action remains in the infantile stages of litigation. Beyond
initialRule26disclosures,therehasbeennodiscovery. Therehavebeen
nosubstantivemotions.Infact,theJointReportofEarlyMeetingandRule
26(f) Discovery Plan (“Plan”) was filed a mere three days ago, two of
which were a weekend. (Doc. 48) In this Plan, amendment of the
pleadings,includingaspecificreferencetothismotion,isaddressed.(Doc.
48).Plaintiffsexplicitlydescribetheamendmentandpointout inSection
III that the amendment only seeks to add parties without materially
altering the general factual allegations. The proposed amendment does
notintroducenewtheoriesofrelief.Thoseallegationsremainunchanged.
Additionally,theproposedamendmentwouldnotaffectthisCourt’s
jurisdiction;saidjurisdictionwouldstillrelyonaquestionoffederallaw.
28U.S.C.§12131,et.seq.Supplementaljurisdictionoverthenewplaintiffs’
state lawcausesofactionwouldremainproper in thisCourtpursuant to
28U.S.C.§1367.
In addition, no prejudice to Disney exists because Disney faces a
lawsuitormultiplelawsuitsbythenewplaintiffsinanyevent,whetherin
this lawsuit or a separate one(s). The assumption in inescapable that
Disneywouldinfactpreferthatitswitnessesgivesingulardepositionsin
lieuofscattered,multipleones.Infact,Disneywouldlikelybenefitbythe
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 5 of 9 Page ID #:615
Page6
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
creation of one lawsuit rather than two, for the same reason that the
Plaintiffswill: thecombinedactionwill save resources inacasewhich is
destined tobequiteexpensive forall concerned.See,Falconv.Scottsdale
Ins. Co., 2006 WL 2434227 (E.D. Wash. 2006) (joinder was warranted
because,interalia,theamendmentwouldconservejudicialresourcesand
reducetheriskofinconsistentresults).
3. NoDelayExists
Plaintiffs did not delay in bringing this proposed amendment
because Plaintiffs were not aware of the existence of the new plaintiffs
untilafterthecomplaintwasfiled.See,e.g.E.E.O.C.v.BoeingCo.,843F.2d
1213, 1222 (9th Cir. 1988) (relevant to evaluating the delay issue is
whether the moving party knew or should have known the facts and
theories raised by the amendment in the original pleading). Moreover,
undersigned counsel needed time to: factually investigate each of the
potential claims; confer with each client about retention of counsel;
evaluate the viability of each person’s claim, and of the viability of the
particular actions theymight bring; provide recommendations regarding
these evaluations to the clients; draft the proposed counts for relief on
behalf of each client; confer with each client about the specific draft
allegations; identify the appropriate guardian ad litem for each disabled
plaintiff; prepare the guardian ad litem petitions for filing immediately
uponfilingofsuit;and,filetheinstantmotion.SeeFed.R.Civ.Pro.,R.11,
infra.
Evenifsomefractionaldelayisallegedtohaveoccurred,delayalone
is insufficientto justifythedenialofamotionrequesting leavetoamend.
DCDPrograms,Ltd.v.Leighton,833F.2d183,187(9thCir.1987).
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 6 of 9 Page ID #:616
Page7
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
4. NoBadFaithorDilatoryMotiveExists
As stated above, Plaintiffs were unaware of the identities of
additionalvictimsofDisney’sdiscriminationuntilaftertheComplaintwas
filed.Immediatelyuponfilingofthecomplaint,therewasanoutpouringof
similarly‐situated complainants,many of whomwere interested in filing
suit against Disney. After, undersigned counsel began a diligent
investigationintotheallegationsofthesenewplaintiffs,whichevenatthe
outsetwereanalogoustotheclaimsoftheexistingplaintiffs. Surelyfour
months is a reasonable amount of time to investigate hundreds of
complaintsofdiscriminationtoultimatelydetermine69oftheoutcriesto
beappropriate towarrantaddition to thecomplaint.1 It follows logically
thatPlaintiffshadnowayofknowingoftheexistenceofthenewplaintiffs
until after the complaint was filed. Following this same logic, Plaintiffs
seek leave to add thesenewplaintiffsafter the complainthasbeen filed,
and after a diligent investigation of the new plaintiffs’ claims has been
conducted. Itwould defy logicwere Plaintiffs to have been aware of the
newplaintiffsatthetimeoffilingthecomplaint,andnot,byvirtueoftheir
then existing knowledge, included the new plaintiffs in the complaint.
Becausethisamendmentflowslogicallyandnaturallyfromthecomplaint,
there exists no evidence that Plaintiffs acted with bad faith or dilatory
motive.
5. TheAmendmentisNotFutile
Futility is simply not in issue. If the original Plaintiffs have viable
claims,itisverylikelytheadditionalclaimswillaswell.Forman,371U.S.
at182(“Iftheunderlyingfactsorcircumstancesrelieduponbyaplaintiff
maybeapropersubjectofrelief,heought tobeaffordedanopportunity 1About280familieswhichincludeadisabledvictimcontactedtheundersigned.Ifamended,44ofthesefamilieswillbePlaintiffs.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 7 of 9 Page ID #:617
Page8
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
totesthisclaimonthemerits.”).Accordingly,Plaintiffsshouldbeafforded
an opportunity to test their claims on themerits by addition of the new
plaintiffs.
6. NoPriorAmendments
Plaintiffs have not previously amended a pleading, or sought leave
fromthisCourttoamendapleading.
7. StatementofLocalRule7‐3Compliance
Plaintiffs note the following in accordancewith Local Rule 7‐3. At
theearlymeetingofcounselwhichoccurred inpersononAugust8,2014,
theundersignedadvisedDisneyoftheintentiontofilesuitonbehalfofthe
additional plaintiffs. Disney expressed no position at that time. On
Tuesday, August 19, 2014, the undersigned advised Disney that the new
suit for the additionalplaintiffswould take the formof an amendment to
the instant action. On Thursday, August 21, Disney advised that such
motion would be opposed. Such opposition was reaffirmed on Friday,
August22,whentheparties’ JointReportofEarlyMeetingofCounselwas
finalizedandfiled(Doc.48).
III. CONCLUSION
LeavetofiletheproposedAmendmenttotheComplaintisproperin
thatDisney facesnoundueprejudice, Plaintiffsdidnotdelay in bringing
this proposed amendment, there exists no bad faith or dilatory motive,
and Plaintiffs have not previously amended any pleadings in this action.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs respectfully request this Court grant leave to file
theirAmendmenttotheComplaint.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 8 of 9 Page ID #:618
Page9
MemorandumofLawinSupportofPlaintiffs’MotionforLeavetoFileAmendmenttoComplaintA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.CaseNo.14‐CV‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned does hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Proof of Service has been electronically filed with the Clerk of the Court pursuant to Local Rule 5-4.1and General Order No. 10-07 regarding Electronic Case Filing in the U.S. District Court, Central District of California by using the CM/ECF system which will send a copy of the documents to counsel of record pursuant to Local Rule 5-3.2.1 to:
RhondaTrotter,Esq.KayeScholerLLP
1999AvenueoftheStars,Suite1700LosAngeles,[email protected]
this 27th day of August, 2014.
/s/AndyDogali [email protected],P.A.101E.KennedyBlvd.,Suite1100Tampa,Florida33602Tel: (813)289‐0700Fax: (813)289‐9435AndEUGENEFELDMANCaliforniaBarNo.118497gfeldmanlaw@att.netEugeneFeldman,AttorneyatLaw,APC555PierAvenue,Suite4HermosaBeach,CA90254Tel:(310)372‐4636Fax:(310)372‐4639AttorneysforPlaintiffs
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52 Filed 08/27/14 Page 9 of 9 Page ID #:619
Page1
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
[email protected],P.A.101E.KennedyBlvd.,Suite1100Tampa,Florida33602Tel: (813)289‐0700Fax: (813)289‐9435
EUGENEFELDMANCaliforniaBarNo.118497gfeldmanlaw@att.netEugeneFeldman,AttorneyatLaw,APC555PierAvenue,Suite4HermosaBeach,CA90254Tel:(310)372‐4636Fax:(310)372‐4639AttorneysforPlaintiffs
UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURTFORTHECENTRALDISTRICTOFCALIFORNIA
A.L.,byandthroughD.L.,etal.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
WALTDISNEYPARKSANDRESORTSU.S.,INC.,
Defendant./
))))))))))
CaseNo.:14‐cv‐3327
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINT
Hon.ManuelL.Real
The Complaint filed in this matter on April 30, 2014 (Doc. 1‐1) is
amendedtoaddthefollowingprovisions.
EXHIBIT 1
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 1 of 334 Page ID #:620
Page2
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT58
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.T.G.v.Disney
649. Plaintiff J.T.G. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
and68above.
650. J.T.G.hasautism.
651. Autism substantially limits a person’s ability to care for himself or
herself,performmanualtasks,speak,learn,read,concentrate,think,
communicate, perceive the concept of time, pair sights and sounds
thathappensimultaneously,andwork.
652. Autistic persons typically lack “Theory of Mind,” the characteristic
whichenablesaperson toattribute thoughts,beliefs, andemotions
to one’s self and to others. Autistic persons are thus unable to
interpret social cues, such as waiting for their turn, to take into
account other persons’ expectations of them, and to distinguish
betweenappropriateandobjectionablesocialbehaviors.
653. Except for the highest‐functioning autistic persons, persons with
autism also lack “Executive Functioning,” which is generally the
ability toprocess information, so they areunable to appreciate the
significance of details within a larger construct, or to grasp the
concept of sequencing individual parts within a whole.
Consequently, expecting an autistic person to comprehend the
conceptofwaiting–anykindofwaiting–isanexerciseinfutility.
654. Perhaps ironically, Disney’s “Magic” often plays a role in the
development of young persons with autism. Parents, special
educationteachers,speechpathologistsandotherprofessionalswho
interactwithautisticchildrenonaregularbasis,oftenuseDisney’s
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 2 of 334 Page ID #:621
Page3
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
adorableandhighly‐recognizablecharacters,cartoons,stories, toys,
andmoviestoassistinopeningautisticchildrentotheworldaround
them. Disneybecomesadrivingforceinthelivesofthesechildren,
and can become the only part of their lives that generates visible
signsoffunandexuberance.
655. J.T.G. is six years of age, and is generally in the care of hismother,
B.D.G., who brings this action as J.T.G.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
656. J.T.G.andB.D.G.areresidentsofClarkCounty,Nevada.
657. J.T.G. andB.D.G. planned J.T.G’s first trip toDisneyland. B.D.G.was
hopefulthatJ.T.G.wouldfindinhisDisneylandexperienceanextent
ofjoythatherarelyshowedinanyothersetting.
658. J.T.G. is incapable of standing in lines without his cognitive
impairments causing him to experience stimming and meltdowns
whenrequired towait ina line foranysignificantperiod. Triggers
and anxiety will cause J.T.G. to exhibit stimming and maladaptive
behaviors including screaming, head banging, high blood pressure
nosebleeds,climbingrails,andthrowinghimselftotheground.
659. Before J.T.G. went to the Disneyland on February 26, 2014, B.D.G.
consultedJ.T.G.’sspecialeducationteacherwhosuggestedtheyplan
out the sequence of rides in advance because J.T.G. is so rigid and
into routine and he will get stressed if they proceed through the
DisneyParkwithoutaplanoriftheydeviatefromtheplan.
660. So J.T.G. and B.D.G. talked about the plan formaneuvering through
theDisneylandwellinadvanceinadvanceofthetrip.
661. N.T.G.alsophonedDisneyinadvanceofthetripwithconcernsabout
accommodationsforhersonintheDisneyParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 3 of 334 Page ID #:622
Page4
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
662. ADisneyrepresentativetoldN.T.G.thattheDASwas“independently
based”andshewasadvisedtobringJ.T.G.’sindividualizededucation
plan and letter, supporting his needs, from his doctor to Guest
RelationswhensheenteredDisneyland.
663. N.T.G. communicated to Disney that J.T.G. could not endure
significantwaitsinlines. Inresponse,shewastoldJ.T.G.wouldnot
havetowaitinline.
664. Disney represented that in addition to the DAS, additional
FastPassesmaybeavailable to J.T.G.atGuestRelations. N.T.G.was
nottoldthatwiththeDAS,N.T.G.wouldhavetocheckinattheride
andbegivenanappointmenttimeforlaterreturn.
665. Based on Disney’s misrepresentation and failed disclosure, B.D.G.
purchased tickets for Disneyland and visited the park on February
26,2014.
666. B.D.G.andJ.T.G.hadanawfulexperience.Theirplancouldnotwork
with the new DAS. The prohibition against making multiple ride
appointmenttimesforcedB.D.G.andJ.T.G.togoondifferentridesin
an unpredictable sequence, because they were required to
continuouslyreturntoGuestRelations.Eachtimetheydidso,J.T.G.
sawanother ridealong theway,but itwas justonemore ride they
couldnotridewithoutanappointment,andforwhichtheycouldnot
makeanappointmentwhilepossessinganotherappointment.
667. The entire experience led tomultiplemeltdowns for J.T.G. During
J.T.G.’s meltdowns his blood pressure rose so high he suffered
nosebleeds.
668. Feelingdefeated, J.T.G.’s fatherbrokedown in tears fromthestress
on his family and the waste of monetary, emotional, and time
resourcesDisneyplacedonhisfamilybynotbetteraccommodating
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 4 of 334 Page ID #:623
Page5
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
his son. Only then, did Guest Relations respond by providing the
family with three passes which were said to be an additional
accommodation.
669. Still having trouble during the day, an attendant at the Gadget
Coaster ride noticed that J.T.G. had a problem and she gave one
memberofhispartyagold‐coloredpasswith thewords“one‐time‐
pass”on it. Shetoldhimthattheyshouldshowthatpass,andthey
would not have to use theDAS pass. This cardwas collected by a
ride attendant and was thus a one‐time‐only accommodation that
didnotlastthelengthofthevisit.
670. DuringoneofJ.T.G.’smeltdowns,B.D.G.tookJ.T.G.bymonorailback
totheresorthotelforabreakandtocalmdownafteranosebleed.
671. Upon returning to Disneyland, J.T.G. continued to struggle with
meltdownsduetothepooraccommodationsforJ.T.G.’sdisability.
672. Moreover, theDAS card is only valid for approximately twoweeks,
despitethefactthatJ.T.G.’sdiagnosiswillnotchange.
673. The expiration of the DAS card after approximately two weeks
assures that each visit to the Parks will begin with stressors, not
pleasures.
674. The new DAS procedure triggered J.T.G.’s meltdowns on February
26,2014.
675. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant has
preventedJ.T.G.fromexperiencingthefullenjoyment,equaltothose
withoutadisability,oftheDisneyParks.
676. TheaccommodationsDisneyclaimstoprovidethroughtheDASdid
notallowJ.T.G.toutilizehisticketinsuchawaythatitprovidedthe
equalenjoymentoftheDisneyParksasthatofanondisabledperson.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 5 of 334 Page ID #:624
Page6
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
677. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate the special needs of those
sufferingwith cognitivedisabilities suchas J.T.G.,Disneypersonnel
offeredineffective,apathetic,obtuseresponsestoB.D.G.’srecitations
regarding J.T.G.’s needs. Their actions and statements were so
contrary to Disney’s body of knowledge and to Disney’s historic
performance that Disney cannot have accidentally proposed such
absurdities.
678. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improve the experience for guests like J.T.G. despite the advanced
noticetheyreceivedofJ.T.G.’sneedsforaccommodations.
679. B.D.G.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theDisneyParks.
680. Disney has refused to conduct an individualized assessment of
J.T.G.’scapacityand for the feasibilityof theDASasa toolorpolicy
foraccommodatinghim.
681. J.T.G.andB.D.G.’s interest inattendingDisneyParks issubstantially
reduced. They would like to return in the future, but they are
deterredbyB.D.G.’sknowledgethattheDASwillonlyleadtofurther
discriminationandmiseryforJ.T.G.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.T.G.,byandthroughB.D.G.ashisnextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.T.G.’s disability;
and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 6 of 334 Page ID #:625
Page7
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT59
BreachofContract
B.D.G.v.Disney
682. Plaintiff B.D.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,and650‐681above.
683. B.D.G. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 7 of 334 Page ID #:626
Page8
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
684. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
685. B.D.G.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffB.D.G.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithB.D.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff B.D.G. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT60
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
J.T.G.v.Disney
686. J.T.G.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through68,and650‐
681above.
687. J.T.G. isandatallmaterial timeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
688. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 8 of 334 Page ID #:627
Page9
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
689. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
690. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
691. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
692. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
J.T.G.’s access toDisney’s programs, services and activities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
693. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs J.T.G. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 9 of 334 Page ID #:628
Page10
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of J.T.G.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.T.G. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 10 of 334 Page ID #:629
Page11
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT61
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
M.D.B.v.Disney
694. PlaintiffM.D.B.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
695. M.D.B. has been diagnosed with pervasive developmental delay,
whichfallswithintheautismspectrum.M.D.B.has limited language
skills and his symptoms include repetitive physical and verbal
gestures, including echolalia. In the presence of certain stimuli or
triggers he experiences hyper‐anxiety that include loud noises,
hyperactivity,bouncingupanddown,and falling to thegroundand
crying. Since he turned14 years of age,M.D.B. has demonstrated a
heightenedpropensityforseizures.
696. M.D.B. does not have the ability to understand abstract concepts,
such as time; nordoeshehave the ability to control himself in the
presence of certain stimuli; both abilities are essential components
ofaperson’sabilitytoidlywait.
697. M.D.B. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
698. M.D.B. is22yearsofageand isgenerally in thecareofhismother,
T.M.B., who brings this action as M.D.B.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
699. T.M.B.andM.D.B.areresidentsofPalmBeachCounty,Florida.
700. From the timeM.D.B.waseightyearsold,M.D.B. andT.M.B. visited
Walt Disney World dozens of times. During those visits, M.D.B.
exhibited a nature and extent of joy that he rarely showed in any
othersetting.T.M.B.wasalwaysproudandjoyfuloftheopportunity
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 11 of 334 Page ID #:630
Page12
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
to bring to her beloved child a level of happiness which he rarely
showedelsewhere.
701. In 1998, T.M.B. and M.D.B. moved from New York to Florida and
began visiting the Disney Parks on a consistent basis. At this time,
M.D.B. carried the Guest Assistance Card, and he was admirably
accommodated. It was an opportunity for T.M.B., M.D.B., and their
family to bond, together, as a family. The GAC allowed T.M.B. and
M.D.B. to experience the Disney Parks in a shorter period of time,
thuseliminating completely the likelihoodofhisanxietyattacks. In
fact,undertheGAC,M.D.B.neverexperiencedhighanxiety levelsat
theDisneyParks.
702. In2013,T.M.B.andM.D.B.werevisitingtheparkssofrequently,they
purchasedannualpasses.FollowingtheirtriptoWaltDisneyWorld
inNovember2013,whentheyweresubjectedtotheDAS,theyhave
notrenewedtheirpasses.
703. M.D.B.’scognitiveimpairmentsmanifestthemselvesinacertainway
during his visits to Disney: M.D.B. favors plans and routines,
oftentimesmapping out their Disney adventure one ride at a time
beforearrivingtotheparks.Evenbeforearrivingatthepark,M.D.B.
has a sequence in hismind of the attractions hewants to visit and
the events he must experience. M.D.B. and T.M.B. then move from
areatoarea,basedonM.D.B.’smap,ridingasmanyridesaspossible
in that specific area. As long as the linesweremoving reasonably
well theycouldsticktoM.D.B.’splan,andhewouldbehappy,calm,
andanxiety‐free.
704. IfM.D.B.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideorattraction
for an extended period, he would experience heightened anxiety.
Similarly, ifhewereaskedtocomebacktoaridein30‐45minutes,
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 12 of 334 Page ID #:631
Page13
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
astheDASwouldhavehimdo,unabletounderstandorprocessthe
reason for such deprivation, and his stimming would escalate
towardmeltdown.Morelikelythannot,M.D.B.wouldrunaway.
705. T.M.B. began planning a trip for M.D.B. to the Disney Parks on
November 13, 2013. In doing so, she learned thatDisney’s policies
regardingtheGAChadchanged.SheemailedDisneyGuestRelations,
inquiring further into these changes. Mark Jones replied to her
confirming that theDAS had replaced the GAC in order to “control
abuse thatwas, unfortunately, growing at an alarming rate.” In his
reply email,Mr. Jones reassuredT.M.B. thatDisneywould continue
toworkindividuallytoaccommodateguestswithdisabilities.
706. OnNovember7,2013,T.M.B.contactedDisneyagain, forassurance
that Disney would be making the promised accommodations for
M.D.B. during their November 15, 2013 visit to the Disney Parks.
Wendi Anderson of Walt Disney World Resort’s Guest Experience
Services responded on November 13, 2013, reassuring T.M.B. that
Disneywouldcontinuetoworkindividuallywithdisabledguests.
707. What T.M.B. and M.D.B. received during their visit to the Disney
Parks was anything but individual treatment. Their Disney
experience started with a one‐hour wait at Guest Relations at the
MagicKingdom.Attheendofthatwait,aDisneyemployeeexplained
that the DAS was their pass – only one ride could be chosen at a
time. The employee asked to see M.D.B. before reviewing M.D.B.’s
medicaldocumentation,takinghispictureandissuinghisDAScard.
708. AtPeterPan’sFlight,M.D.B.wasgrantedreasonablypromptaccess,
but therideoperatormade it clear thatwasnot theway thepolicy
worked – that he was merely making a one‐time exception and
T.M.B.wasinstructednottoexpectthisagain.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 13 of 334 Page ID #:632
Page14
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
709. Afterwaitinganotherextendedperiodforabustoarrive,T.M.B.and
M.D.B.boardedabustoHollywoodStudios.TheirtimeatHollywood
Studios was little better, as most of the time had to be spent
developingM.D.B.’splanforthatparkanditsattractions,whichthey
wereagainunable to experiencebecauseof theprohibitionagainst
obtaining a second ride appointment time until the first one is
completed.
710. Overall, T.M.B. andM.D.B. left Hollywood studios disappointed and
disillusioned by Disney’s new capricious and unaccommodating
policiestowarddisabledguestssuchasM.D.B.
711. Since their November 2013 trip, T.M.B. has only taken M.D.B. to
Hollywood studios, fearful of what awaits them at the Magic
Kingdom. T.M.B. fears the day M.D.B. asks her to take him to the
Magic Kingdom because she knows this trip will, overall, be an
unaccommodatingandun‐magicalexperience.
712. After October 9, 2013, M.D.B. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionM.D.B. andT.M.B.had receivedwhen
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
713. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate M.D.B.’s needs, M.D.B. and T.M.B. have been
discouraged and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
park'sridesandattractions.T.M.B.wouldvisittheParkswithM.D.B.
more often if Disney had not abandoned its past policy of
accommodating the special needs of persons with cognitive
impairments. Their interest in attending the Parks is substantially
reduced. T.M.B. knows they should avoid attending the parks as
much in the future due to the expectation that the experiencewill
continuetobeanun‐magicalandun‐accommodatingone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 14 of 334 Page ID #:633
Page15
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
714. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate M.D.B.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessmentofM.D.B.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefused
to modify the DAS to allow M.D.B. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
715. Disney personnel have shown no willingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeM.D.B.
716. T.M.B.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.D.B., by and through T.M.B. as his next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account ofM.D.B.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 15 of 334 Page ID #:634
Page16
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT62
BreachofContract
T.M.B.v.Disney
717. Plaintiff T.M.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 695 through 716
above.
718. T.M.B. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
719. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
720. T.M.B.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffT.M.B.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithT.M.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.M.B. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 16 of 334 Page ID #:635
Page17
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT63
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
S.A.B.v.Disney
721. PlaintiffS.A.B.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
722. S.A.B.hasautism.Additionally,S.A.B.suffersfrompulmonaryissues.
S.A.B.’ssymptomsandstemmingpatternsincludetalkingtohimself,
looking at his hands, spinning in circles, and ticks and twitches,
mainlyinhisfaceandhead.BehavioralmeltdownsforS.A.B.consist
generally of aggressive behavior directed toward himself, andmay
go so far as to physically cause harm to himself by biting and
scratchingwhenheisespeciallyangry.
723. S.A.B.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
724. S.A.B.is17yearsoldandisgenerallyinthecareofhisfather,M.F.B.,
who brings this action as S.A.B.'s next friend, parent and natural
guardian,andhismother,M.B.B.
725. S.A.B.andM.F.B.areresidentsofPascoCounty,Florida.
726. When S.A.B. was three years old, S.A.B. and M.F.B. drove cross‐
countryfromFresno,CaliforniatoFlorida.TheirfirststopwasWalt
Disney World. Prior to October of 2013, when S.A.B. and M.F.B.
visitedWaltDisneyWorld, S.A.B. carried theGuestAssistanceCard
(GAC) andwas admirably accommodated. S.A.B. exhibited a nature
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 17 of 334 Page ID #:636
Page18
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
andextentof joythatherarelyshowedinanyothersetting. M.F.B.
wasproudandjoyfuloftheopportunitytobringtohisbelovedsona
levelofhappinesswhichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
727. Aftermoving to Florida, S.A.B. andM.F.B. purchased annual passes
andbeganattendingtheDisneyParksaboutonceaweek.S.A.B.was
instantlyhookedonallthingsDisney,lookingupYouTubevideosin
his free time and using every available opportunity to talk about
theirnexttriptotheDisneyParks.
728. S.A.B.’scognitive impairmentsmanifestthemselves inacertainway
during his visits to the parks; S.A.B. is incapable of understanding
the concept visiting a ride or attraction only to be prohibited from
riding ituntil a future time.S.A.B.doesnotunderstand theconcept
ofpresent‐tensedeprivationinexchangeforfuture‐tensereward.
729. S.A.B. is also a “repeat rider.” This is a propensity common among
autistic persons – a variety of the need for consistency, order and
routine.S.A.B.willexperienceaparticularrideorattraction,suchas
BigThunderMountainRailroadorTowerofTerror, over andover,
forseveralhoursatatime.Disneypersonnelareveryfamiliarwith
therepeatridertypeofguest.
730. Additionally, S.A.B. must experience the park in a specific order.
Disruptions in their planned routine tend to escalate his stimming
behaviorstowardmeltdowns.S.A.B.typicallyhasastrictschedulein
hisheadoftheWaltDisneyWorldrideshemustride,andtheorder
in which hemust ride them. Deviation from that orderwill likely
leadtoameltdown.
731. Similarly,ifS.A.B.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideor
attractionformorethanafewminutes,hewouldlikelymeltdown.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 18 of 334 Page ID #:637
Page19
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
732. Under the GAC, S.A.B. andM.F.B. almost always had a pleasurable,
meltdown‐free experience at the Disney Parks; S.A.B. was able to
ridetherideshewantedtoride,intheorderheneededtoridethem
in. When S.A.B. wanted to repeat a ride, under the GAC, he could
withoutissueormeltdown.
733. The new DAS immediately eliminated the ability to experience the
parkinanypredicablesequence,aswellastheabilitytorepeat‐ride.
This became apparent during S.A.B. and M.F.B.’s first trip to the
Disney Parks five days after the DAS came into effect in October
2013.
734. M.F.B.andS.A.B.arrivedtotheDisneyParks,andjustastheyhadin
thepast,andwenttoGuestRelations,GACinhand.Twohourslater,
while S.A.B. rode the Monorail with his mother for an attempted
distraction, M.F.B. spoke with an employee who informed him
Disney no longer accepted the GAC. S.A.B. was then issued a DAS
card.
735. In theprocess of doing so, the employee askedM.F.B.what S.A.B.’s
special needs and limitations were. M.F.B. responded that S.A.B. is
unable to wait extended periods of time because he does not
understand the concept; he likewise does not understand the
conceptofvisitingaridetonotrideit,orfortherighttorideitlater.
M.F.B. explained that, in either event, S.A.B.would reactwildly and
irrationally.Inresponse,theemployeeofferedtheDAS.
736. Next, the employee attempted to take S.A.B.’s picture for the DAS
card, a situation which can prove difficult for many children
diagnosedwith autism. S.A.B. could not understandwhy he had to
havehispicturetaken,muchlessstandstill for longenoughforthe
picturetobetaken.Intheprocessofdoingso,S.A.B.droppeddown
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 19 of 334 Page ID #:638
Page20
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
tohiskneestoavoidbeing inthecamera’sperspective,andrubbed
themuntiltheywererawwithblood.
737. Finally, the DAS was obtained, and their disenchanting and
unwelcomingdayintheDisneyParkscouldbegin.
738. Despite Disney’s arbitrary treatment toward S.A.B. and M.F.B. as a
result of theDAS, S.A.B. andM.F.B.make it apoint to return to the
DisneyParksweekly,M.F.B.refusingto“letDisneydefeatus.”M.B.B.
can no longer bear the experience, particularly the sight of S.A.B.’s
constantconfusion, frustrationandanxiety. Shecannotaccompany
S.A.B.andM.F.B.ontheirvisitstotheParks.
739. OnanotheroccasionatEpcot,whileatGuestRelations,anemployee
requestedM.F.B.’sdriver’slicenseandpriorDAStoseeiftheywere
eligible for FastPasses. He then disappeared into a back office of
GuestRelations for20minutes,duringwhich timeS.A.B. suffereda
meltdown. M.F.B., desperate to save his beloved son from the
terriblesituationhewasnowin,wentbehindthecountertoaskthe
employee for his documents back. A Disney security guard
immediately responded, bellowing forM.F.B. towait in frontof the
counter, and worse, threatening to escort S.A.B. and M.F.B. off the
DisneypropertyifS.A.B.“didn’tbehave.”TheDisneyemployeethen
notifiedM.F.B. thathis son’sDAScardwasnowbeing revoked. No
FastPasseswereissued.
740. Another employee, who was observing close by, pulled M.F.B. and
S.A.B. aside as theywere about to leave, andmadehima duplicate
DAS. S.A.B.andM.F.B. thenenteredEpcotandembarkedonanun‐
accommodating adventure which became more bizarre as the day
continued. They visited Mission: SPACE, then Innoventions. Upon
leaving Innoventions, M.F.B. noticed he was being followed by a
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 20 of 334 Page ID #:639
Page21
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Disney employee. M.F.B. asked the employee why he was being
followed,only torealize theemployeewasalsoasupervisor.M.F.B.
beganexplainingtheeventsofearlierthatdayatGuestRelations,to
which the Disney Supervisor responded with a query: “Why was
your original DAS torn up?” M.F.B., now baffled beyond all belief,
explained he had not torn up his DAS. The Disney Supervisor then
disengaged,anddisappearedbackintothechaosandconfusionthat
isDisneyundertheDAS.
741. On yet another occasion, while at Hollywood Studios, M.F.B. and
S.A.B. encountered a Disney employee who was unique in that he
tried to accommodate S.A.B.’s special needs; he gave them 12
FastPasses.Whileitwasabreathoffreshairtoreceivethiskindof
treatment for a change, it did not eliminate undue stress. The
inconsistency of the Disney employees, both ride operators and
Guest Relations, and the profoundly un‐accommodating and
arbitrarypolicywhich is theDAS, createsa levelof stress towhich
S.A.B. and M.F.B. should not be subjected. Disney’s non‐disabled
guests can look forward tocalm,happy, stress‐freedays;S.A.B.and
M.F.B.cannot.M.F.B.continueshisvowtonot letDisneydefeathim
andhissonbydeterringthemfromeverreturningagain.ForM.F.B.,
all the stress in the world is worth it so long as he can see his
belovedsonsmile,evenforraremoments.
742. M.F.B.has contactedGuestRelationsonmultipleoccasions, looking
for answers; hoping to find some kind of order amidst the chaos.
Eachtime,M.F.B.hasbeeninstructedbyGuestRelationstoreturnto
theDisneyParks, and try itout– that this timewouldbedifferent.
Each time they return, the situation isnodifferent – there remains
no effort to reasonably accommodate S.A.B., and particularly no
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 21 of 334 Page ID #:640
Page22
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
effort toperforman individual assessmentofwhether theDAS can
accommodateS.A.B.’saccessibilityneeds.
743. M.F.B.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
744. After October 9, 2013, S.A.B. no longer received the type of
accommodation and attention S.A.B. andM.F.B. had received when
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
745. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodateS.A.B.’sneeds,S.A.B.andM.F.B.havebeendiscouraged
anddeterredfromthefulluseandenjoymentofthepark'sridesand
attractions.
746. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate S.A.B.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessment of S.A.B.'s capacity to utilize theDAS, andhave refused
to modify the DAS to allow S.A.B. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff S.A.B., by and through M.F.B. as his next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of S.A.B.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 22 of 334 Page ID #:641
Page23
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT64
BreachofContract
M.F.B.v.Disney
747. Plaintiff M.F.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 722 through 746
above.
748. M.F.B. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
749. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
750. M.F.B.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 23 of 334 Page ID #:642
Page24
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.F.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithM.F.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.F.B. in the amount of his
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT65
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
M.F.B.v.Disney
751. Plaintiff M.F.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 722 through 746
above.
752. During one ormore visits to the Parks, M.F.B.’s beloved son S.A.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinM.F.B.’spresence.
753. The symptoms and conditions associated with S.A.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoS.A.B.underFloridalaw.
754. S.A.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofS.A.B.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewS.A.B.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
755. M.F.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
S.A.B.’s resulting escalation andhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of his trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 24 of 334 Page ID #:643
Page25
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
applicable law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardhis
son,M.F.B.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
756. M.F.B.’s observation of S.A.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused S.A.B. to
experience the meltdown caused M.F.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.F.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
M.F.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoM.F.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.F.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT66
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
M.F.B.v.Disney
757. Plaintiff M.F.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 722 through 746
above.
758. During one ormore visits to the Parks, M.F.B.’s beloved son S.A.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
759. The symptoms and conditions associated with S.A.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 25 of 334 Page ID #:644
Page26
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
760. S.A.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of S.A.B. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
S.A.B. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
761. M.F.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
S.A.B.’s resulting escalation andhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of his trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardhis
son,M.F.B.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
762. M.F.B.’s observation of S.A.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused S.A.B. to
experience the meltdown caused M.F.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.F.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponM.F.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoM.F.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.F.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 26 of 334 Page ID #:645
Page27
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT67
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
M.B.B.v.Disney
763. Plaintiff M.B.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 722 through 746
above.
764. During one ormore visits to the Parks,M.B.B.’s beloved son S.A.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinM.B.B.’spresence.
765. The symptoms and conditions associated with S.A.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoS.A.B.underFloridalaw.
766. S.A.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofS.A.B.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewS.A.B.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
767. M.B.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
S.A.B.’s resulting escalation andhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,M.B.B.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
768. M.B.B.’s observation of S.A.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused S.A.B. to
experience themeltdown causedM.B.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.B.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 27 of 334 Page ID #:646
Page28
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
M.B.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoM.B.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.B.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT68
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
M.B.B.v.Disney
769. Plaintiff M.B.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 722 through 746
above.
770. During one ormore visits to the Parks,M.B.B.’s beloved son S.A.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
771. The symptoms and conditions associated with S.A.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
772. S.A.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of S.A.B. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
S.A.B. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
773. M.B.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
S.A.B.’s resulting escalation andhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 28 of 334 Page ID #:647
Page29
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,M.B.B.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
774. M.B.B.’s observation of S.A.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused S.A.B. to
experience themeltdown causedM.B.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.B.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponM.B.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoM.B.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.B.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT69
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.L.B.v.Disney
775. Plaintiff J.L.B. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
776. J.L.B. has autism spectrum disorder, global development disorder,
andspeechandlanguagedelaywithapraxia.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 29 of 334 Page ID #:648
Page30
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
777. J.L.B. is 10 years of age and is generally in the care of hismother,
H.M.B., who brings this action as J.L.B.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
778. J.L.B. andH.M.B. are residents ofWorcester County,Massachusetts.
J.L.B.’s grandmother, C.M.B., is also a resident of Worcester,
Massachusetts.
779. J.L.B. and H.M.B. visitedWalt DisneyWorld on or about December
2013,alongwithC.M.B.
780. J.L.B. is incapable of standing in lines without his cognitive
impairments causing him to experience anxiety, stimming and
meltdownswhenrequiredtowaitinalineforanysignificantperiod.
Triggers will cause J.L.B. pulling on his clothes, create groaning
noises,compulsivelyplacehishandsinfrontofhiseyes,fidgetswith
his hands, repetitively pick up toys and put them down, make
repetitive behaviors, statements, and facial expressions/grimaces.
J.L.B.willexhibitself‐hittingofhislegorchestaswell.
781. J.L.B.’sstimmingleadstomeltdownswhichtaketheformoffallingto
thegroundandflailingwildly. J.L.B.willpurposelyvomittogetout
of the line or situation. He will repetitively hit his own legs and
chest. With the new DAS, Disney has constructed conditions that
tendtoprovokesuchmeltdowns,andJ.L.B.sufferedmeltdownsasa
result.Becauseofthemandtheconstantstressorsthatleadtothem,
DisneypreventsJ.L.B.fromexperiencingthefullenjoyment,equalto
thosewithoutadisability,oftheDisneyParks.
782. H.M.B.grewupaDisneyfan,attendingCalifornia’sDisneylandParks
often.Shewasexcitedtosharewithhersonthesamejoyandmagic
shehadalwaysfeltattheDisneyParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 30 of 334 Page ID #:649
Page31
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
783. H.M.B.’s mother and J.L.B.’s grandmother, C.M.B., shared in this
elation;ithadbeenC.M.B.’slifelongdreamtotakehergrandchildren
toWaltDisneyWorld.
784. Unfortunately, this joy and magic was dwarfed by disappointment
duringtheirfirstvisittoWalkDisneyWorldonDecember18,2013.
J.L.B. suffered a tragicmeltdown, and H.M.B.’s and C.M.B.’s dreams
shatteredbeforetheireyes.
785. H.M.B.andJ.L.B.’sgenerallyunmagicalanddisappointingdaybegan
at9:30AM,when theydeparted from theirhotel destined forWalt
DisneyWorld.
786. J.L.B.hadhisheartsetonridingthemonorailtrainfromthehotelto
the Magic Kingdom. This would be the first of many
disappointments;themonorailwasnotworkingandthelineforthe
ferrywas 45minutes. Upon finally arriving, theyweremetwith a
45‐minutewaitatCityHall.
787. The employee at City Hall, astonishingly, asked H.M.B. to provide
documentedproofof J.L.B.’sdisability.That sameemployeeoffered
little explanation about the DAS and how it worked, leaving
confusionfortheremainderoftheday.
788. Once inside the Park, H.M.B. and J.L.B. encountered progressively
longerridewaittimes:10minutesatDumbotheFlyingElephant;25
minutes at The Barnstormer; 30 minutes at Tomorrowland
Speedway; 45 minutes at Space Mountain; and 90 minutes at Big
ThunderMountainRailroad.
789. At Big Thunder Mountain Railroad, the initial wait time was 40
minutes. H.M.B. was conflicted as a parent because while she new
J.M.B.was running desperately low on tolerance, given the already
longdayofwaitsbehindthem,neverthelessshealsoknewofJ.M.B.’s
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 31 of 334 Page ID #:650
Page32
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
deep love for trains and his desire to experience this particular
Disney ride. H.M.B. pleaded with a Disney ride operator for some
special accommodation, to no avail. Eventually, H.M.B. kept the
familyinthelineandwasrelievedthataftera40‐minutewait,they
reached the front of the line,meltdown‐free. Upon arriving at the
frontofthe line,however,H.M.B.’shusbandwastoldhewouldonly
be granted access through the general population line,was given a
lanyard,andwasrequiredtore‐enterthroughthestandbyline.This
unanticipated separation was chaotic for J.M.B.; unable to be
separated, J.M.B. re‐entered the standby line with his father and
H.M.B. Unable to endure thewait, J.M.B. sufferedameltdownafter
starting the wait and line over. The dream of a magical Disney
experiencewasnowreplacedbytheimageofJ.M.B.’sfather,hugging
J.M.B.tightlytoappeasehismeltdown,whilebeingtrappedmid‐line
withnowheretogo.
790. InordertoexperiencethefacilitiesandservicesoftheDisneyParks
since the implementationof theDAS, J.L.B.was forced to idly stand
inanextended‐duration line,enduringallpotential triggers, atCity
HalltohavehisphotographtakenandaDisabilityAccessCardmade
forhim.
791. Similarly, each time J.L.B. wants to experience Disney Parks, he is
forcedto idlywaitamongsttriggeraftertrigger forreturntimeson
eachridewhichlimittheorderinwhichhecanexperiencetherides.
792. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
factthatJ.L.B.’sdiagnosiswillnotchange.TheexpirationoftheDAS
card after approximately two weeks assures that each visit to the
Parkswillbeginwithstressors,notpleasures.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 32 of 334 Page ID #:651
Page33
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
793. Realizing it is impossible for J.M.B. tohaveamagicalandenjoyable
experience at the Disney Parks, J.M.B. and H.M.B. left that day,
vowingtoneverreturnsolongastheDASwasstillinplace.
794. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate J.L.B.’s special needs,
Disney personnel now offered ineffective, apathetic, obtuse
responses to H.M.B.’s recitations regarding J.L.B.’s needs. Their
actions were so contrary to Disney’s body of knowledge and to
Disney’s historic performance thatDisney cannot have accidentally
proposedsuchabsurdities.
795. Disneypersonnelrefusetoperformanindividualizedassessmentof
J.L.B.’s accessibility needs, and of the DAS’s suitability as an
accommodationspolicyforhim.
796. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeJ.L.B.
797. C.M.B. and H.M.B. each incurred expenses associated with the
family’swastedtripstotheParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.L.B.,byandthroughH.M.B.ashisparentand
natural guardian, prays that this Court adjudicate this dispute and enter
anOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.L.B.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 33 of 334 Page ID #:652
Page34
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT70
BreachofContract
C.M.B.v.Disney
798. Plaintiff C.M.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
799. C.M.B. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
800. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
801. C.M.B.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 34 of 334 Page ID #:653
Page35
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffC.M.B.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithC.M.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.M.B. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT71
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.L.B.v.Disney
802. Plaintiff J.L.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
803. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.L.B. suffered an actual
meltdown.
804. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
805. J.L.B.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofJ.L.B.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knew J.L.B. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated in sucha
mannerbyanyone.
806. J.L.B.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.L.B.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 35 of 334 Page ID #:654
Page36
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.L.B., by and through H.M.B. as J.L.B.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
J.L.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.L.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.L.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT72
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.L.B.v.Disney
807. Plaintiff J.L.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
808. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.L.B. suffered an actual
meltdown.
809. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
810. J.L.B.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.L.B. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.L.B.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 36 of 334 Page ID #:655
Page37
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
811. J.L.B.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.L.B.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.L.B., by and through H.M.B. as J.L.B.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponJ.L.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.L.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.L.B. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT73
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.M.B.v.Disney
812. Plaintiff C.M.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
813. During one or more visits to the Parks, C.M.B.’s beloved grandson
J.L.B.sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinC.M.B.’spresence.
814. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoJ.L.B.underFloridalaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 37 of 334 Page ID #:656
Page38
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
815. J.L.B.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofJ.L.B.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knew J.L.B. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated in sucha
mannerbyanyone.
816. C.M.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
J.L.B.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown.Particularlyinlightof
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardher grandson,
C.M.B.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
817. C.M.B.’s observation of J.L.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused J.L.B. to
experience the meltdown caused C.M.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.M.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
C.M.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.M.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.M.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 38 of 334 Page ID #:657
Page39
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT74
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.M.B.v.Disney
818. Plaintiff C.M.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
819. During one or more visits to the Parks, C.M.B.’s beloved grandson
J.L.B.sufferedanactualmeltdown.
820. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
821. J.L.B.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.L.B. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.L.B.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
822. C.M.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
J.L.B.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown.Particularlyinlightof
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardher grandson,
C.M.B.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
823. C.M.B.’s observation of J.L.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused J.L.B. to
experience the meltdown caused C.M.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.M.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 39 of 334 Page ID #:658
Page40
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponC.M.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.M.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.M.B. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT75
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
H.M.B.v.Disney
824. Plaintiff H.M.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
825. During one or more visits to the Parks, H.M.B.’s beloved son J.L.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinH.M.B.’spresence.
826. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoJ.L.B.underFloridalaw.
827. J.L.B.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofJ.L.B.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knew J.L.B. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated in sucha
mannerbyanyone.
828. H.M.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
J.L.B.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown.Particularlyinlightof
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 40 of 334 Page ID #:659
Page41
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
lawandactinagraciousandcaringmannertowardherson,H.M.B.
coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
829. H.M.B.’s observation of J.L.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused J.L.B. to
experience themeltdown caused H.M.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff H.M.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
H.M.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoH.M.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff H.M.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT76
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
H.M.B.v.Disney
830. Plaintiff H.M.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
831. During one or more visits to the Parks, H.M.B.’s beloved son J.L.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 41 of 334 Page ID #:660
Page42
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
832. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
833. J.L.B.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.L.B. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.L.B.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
834. H.M.B. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
J.L.B.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown.Particularlyinlightof
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
lawandactinagraciousandcaringmannertowardherson,H.M.B.
coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
835. H.M.B.’s observation of J.L.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused J.L.B. to
experience themeltdown caused H.M.B. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff H.M.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponH.M.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoH.M.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff H.M.B. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 42 of 334 Page ID #:661
Page43
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT77
BreachofContract
H.M.B.v.Disney
836. Plaintiff H.M.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 776 through 797
above.
837. H.M.B. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
838. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
839. H.M.B. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffH.M.B.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithH.M.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff H.M.B. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 43 of 334 Page ID #:662
Page44
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT78
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
D.L.B.v.Disney
840. PlaintiffD.L.B.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
651through654,and68above.
841. D.L.B. has autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and
oppositionaldefiancedisorder.Healsosuffersfromamooddisorder
and anxiety. D.L.B.’s symptoms include aggression, impulsiveness,
defiance, attention problems, social problems, and oppositional
behaviorsincludingrunningfromcaregivers,arguing,andtantrums.
Behavior meltdowns for D.L.B. consist generally of a heightened
propensity to elope and aggressive behavior directed toward his
nearbyfamilymembers,includingbiting,scratching,hitting,kicking,
andhead‐butting.
842. D.L.B.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
843. D.L.B. is nine years old and is generally in the care of hermother,
L.V.F. who brings this action as D.L.B.'s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
844. D.L.B.andL.V.F.areresidentsofDelNorteCounty,California.
845. L.V.F. grew up a Disney lover; annual trips to Disneyland were a
familialtradition.
846. L.V.F. first took D.L.B. to Disneyland in 2010when D.L.B. was four
yearsold.Unfortunately, L.V.F.,whowas alsopregnant at the time,
did not know the GACwas available to D.L.B. during that trip, and
theyattemptedtoenjoythedayvisitingtheattractionsthroughthe
standby lines. Given D.L.B.’s condition, doing so made the day a
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 44 of 334 Page ID #:663
Page45
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
largely un‐accommodating experience, but nowhere near as un‐
accommodating as the DAS. Even during the first pre‐DAS visit,
without theGAC,D.L.B.exhibitedanatureandextentof joy thathe
rarely showed in any other setting. L.V.F. was always proud and
joyful of the opportunity to bring to her beloved child a level of
happinesswhichsherarelyshowedelsewhere.Disneylandprovided
the unique chance to take D.L.B. out of his box and allow him to
experiencetheworldasothernon‐disabledchildrenareableto.
847. D.L.B.’s cognitive impairments have manifested themselves in a
certainwayduringthefamily’svisitstotheParks. D.L.B.’sdisorder
makes it very difficult for him to stand idly in line for an extended
periodoftime.
848. D.L.B’s disorders also compel him to experience certain Disney
attractions repetitively. D.L.B. can be a “repeat rider.” This is a
propensity commonamong autistic persons – a variety of theneed
forconsistency,orderandroutine.D.L.B.willexperienceaparticular
rideorattraction,suchasBuzzLightyear,overandover,forseveral
hoursatatime. Disneypersonnelareveryfamiliarwiththerepeat
rider type of guest. If D.L.B.were denied the ability to ride a ride
such as Buzz Lightyear repetitively, he would experience a
meltdown.
849. IfD.L.B.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideorattraction
formorethanafewminuteshealsowouldlikelymeltdown.During
the wait, his stimming behaviors would escalate in frequency or
severity. If he is not removed from the condition, or the condition
removedfromhim,ameltdownwilloccur.Mostlikely,D.L.B.would
eventuallyelope,orrunawaywithoutwarning.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 45 of 334 Page ID #:664
Page46
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
850. BecauseD.L.B.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitinga
rideorattractiononly tobeprohibited fromriding ituntila future
time, thenewDAS creates avoidable stressors forD.L.B., escalating
his stimming patterns towardmeltdowns, especially in high traffic
areas of the park. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS,
D.L.B.hasexperiencedseveralmeltdownsatDisneyland.
851. Due to its failure to accommodate which leads to an increased
propensity for D.L.B. experiencing a meltdown, Defendant has
preventedD.L.B. from experiencing the full enjoyment of its Parks,
equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
852. L.V.F. and D.L.B.’s first and only visit to Disneyland under the DAS
wasMarch28,2014.Aftera45‐minutewaitandatripupaflightof
stairswithaspecialneedsstrollerforherotherchild,whohasbeen
diagnosed with Down syndrome, L.V.F. was able to speak with an
employee at Guest Relations. The employee then required L.V.F. to
explainD.L.B.’sdisabilitytoherandexplainwhytheyneededaDAS
card. L.V.F. was given a DAS card for D.L.B., and a sticker for her
otherchildwhicheffectivelyturnedthespecialneedsstrollerintoa
wheelchair, forcing her to wait in line. Disneyland no longer
recognizes mobility disabilities and Down syndrome was not,
according to Disney, a cognitive impairment requiring a DAS card.
Thus, L.V.F.’s family would effectively become split up; one
cognitivelyimpairedchildgiventheDAScardanddestinedtoatrip
ofreturntimeswhiletheotherchildwouldbeforcedtowait inthe
standby line because she had audacity to also require mobility
assistance.
853. L.V.F. began their newDisney experience,much ofwhich consisted
of running between kiosks to determine or obtain ride times.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 46 of 334 Page ID #:665
Page47
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Eventually, D.L.B. was able to ride a ride, with the first one being
PiratesoftheCaribbeanwithamere45‐minutereturntime.
854. Thenext stop on theirDisney adventurewasBuzz Lightyear. After
waiting the requisite 25 minutes, as given to them at the Kiosk
before going to the actual ride, L.V.F. and D.L.B. entered the line.
Mid‐queue, there was an earthquake, subsequently shutting down
the ride. L.V.F. and D.L.B. were asked to come back. But because
D.L.B.’s DAS card had already been scratched off by the Disney
employee, D.L.B. was required to obtain a new return time and
repeatthewait.
855. After riding Buzz Lightyear, D.L.B. wanted and expected to repeat‐
ride.L.V.F. returned to therideoperatorandasked ifwhether they
couldrideBuzzLightyearagain.TherideoperatorlookedatD.L.B.’s
card, said this would not be possible because there was no return
timewrittendown,andadvisedtheyreturntothekiosk.Butbefore
L.V.F. could take D.B.L. back to the kiosk to do just that, he
experienced a meltdown and immediately ran off in the opposite
direction. As he did this, the Disney ride operator told L.V.F. what
hersonneededwas“agoodol’fashionedspankin’.”
856. L.V.F.andD.L.B.lefttheDisneyParksthatnight,feelingdejectedand
frustrated, but hopeful that the next day would be the magical
Disneyexperiencetheyhadhopedfor;theoneforwhichtheyspent
monthssavingandtwodaystraveling.
857. L.V.F. andD.L.B. returned to theDisneyParks thenextday, only to
beasdisappointedandun‐accommodatedas the first.This,despite
the fact that they explained to employees at kiosks that the new
system was not working for them. They encountered a 60‐minute
wait at Star Tours. Unable to wait in line for such a time, L.V.F.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 47 of 334 Page ID #:666
Page48
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
attempted to take D.L.B. away and consume the time awaiting the
return to Star Tours. During that effort, D.L.B. suffered multiple
meltdowns.Afterridingonlytworides,L.V.F.wasforcedtoleavethe
Disney Parks earlywith L.V.F.; she could not continue to allowher
sontosuffer.
858. ThethirddayatDisneylandwasasunfulfillinganddisastrousasthe
first.UponarrivingatPinocchiofortheirreturntime,thealternative
line entrancewas indiscernible. L.V.F. asked aDisney employee to
helpherlocatetheentrance.Hethenexplainedthatshehadtogoto
the “regular line andwait like everyone else.” This of course, after
alreadywaitingtherequisitetimeasindicatedontheirDAScard.
859. OverthecourseofthreedaysattheDisneyParks,D.L.B.rodeatotal
ofsevenrides.
860. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodateD.L.B.’sneeds,D.L.B.andL.V.F.havebeendiscouraged
anddeterredfromthefulluseandenjoymentofthepark'sridesand
attractions. L.V.F. would visit the Parks with D.L.B. more often if
Disney had not abandoned its past policy of accommodating the
specialneedsofpersonswithcognitiveimpairments. Theirinterest
in attending the Parks is substantially reduced. L.V.F. knows they
shouldavoidattendingtheparksinthefutureduetothereasonable
expectation that the experience would again subject D.L.B. to
unlawfuldiscrimination,and that theywouldsimplysuffer through
anotherun‐magicalandun‐accommodatingday.
861. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate D.L.B.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 48 of 334 Page ID #:667
Page49
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
assessmentofD.L.B.'s capacity toutilize theDAS, andhave refused
to modify the DAS to allow D.L.B. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
862. Disney personnel have shown no willingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeD.L.B.
863. L.V.F.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.L.B. by and through L.V.F., as D.L.B.'s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of D.L.B.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 49 of 334 Page ID #:668
Page50
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Count79
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
D.L.B.v.Disney
864. D.L.B. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and841through863above.
865. D.L.B.isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
866. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
867. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
868. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
869. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
870. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
D.L.B.’saccesstoDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities. Disney
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 50 of 334 Page ID #:669
Page51
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
hasinstitutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
871. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs D.L.B. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account ofD.L.B.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 51 of 334 Page ID #:670
Page52
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.L.B. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT80
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.L.B.v.Disney
872. Plaintiff D.L.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 841 through 863
above.
873. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.L.B. suffered an actual
meltdown.
874. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
875. D.L.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofD.L.B.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 52 of 334 Page ID #:671
Page53
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
knewD.L.B.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
876. D.L.B.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
D.L.B. to experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.L.B., by and through L.V.F. as D.L.B.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
D.L.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.L.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.L.B. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT81
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.L.B.v.Disney
877. Plaintiff D.L.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 67, 651 through 654, and 841 through 863
above.
878. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.L.B. suffered an actual
meltdown.
879. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 53 of 334 Page ID #:672
Page54
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
880. D.L.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of D.L.B. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
D.L.B. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
881. D.L.B.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
D.L.B. to experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.L.B., by and through L.V.F. as D.L.B.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponD.L.B.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.L.B.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.L.B. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 54 of 334 Page ID #:673
Page55
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT82
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.V.F.v.Disney
882. Plaintiff L.V.F. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 841 through 863
above.
883. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.V.F.’s beloved son D.L.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinL.V.F.’spresence.
884. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoD.L.B.underCalifornialaw.
885. D.L.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofD.L.B.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewD.L.B.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
886. L.V.F. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
D.L.B.’s resulting escalationandhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,L.V.F.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
887. L.V.F.’s observation of D.L.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused D.L.B. to
experience the meltdown caused L.V.F. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.V.F. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 55 of 334 Page ID #:674
Page56
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
L.V.F.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.V.F.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.V.F. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT83
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.V.F.v.Disney
888. Plaintiff L.V.F. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 67, 651 through 654, and 841 through 863
above.
889. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.V.F.’s beloved son D.L.B.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
890. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.L.B.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
891. D.L.B.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of D.L.B. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
D.L.B. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
892. L.V.F. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
D.L.B.’s resulting escalationandhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 56 of 334 Page ID #:675
Page57
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,L.V.F.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
893. L.V.F.’s observation of D.L.B.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused D.L.B. to
experience the meltdown caused L.V.F. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.V.F. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponL.V.F.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.V.F.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.V.F. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT84
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
T.E.F.v.Disney
894. PlaintiffT.E.F.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
895. T.E.F. is generally in the care of hermother, T.L.F.,whobrings this
actionasT.E.F.’snextfriend,parentandnaturalguardian.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 57 of 334 Page ID #:676
Page58
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
896. T.E.F.andT.L.F.areresidentsofCanada.
897. T.E.F. is twelve years old.T.E.F. is diagnosedwith autism spectrum
disorder. She requiresahigh leveloforder to functionandcannot
deviatefromherfixedunderstandingoftheorderofthings.Shehas
to know precisely what’s going to happen in a day, and in what
order. If the order is changed, she has a complete meltdown and
mustaskwhytheorderofthingswaschanged.
898. T.E.F.stimsalmostconstantly.Whenshe’sexcitedorupset,sheflaps
her hands, and walks back and forth. When she’s upset and her
anxietygoesup,sheconstantlybitesherhandsandnails(shehasno
nailsatthispoint).Theybleedwhenshetriestobitethem.Shehas
areasofherhandswithoutskin,becauseshe’sbittenthemsooften.
899. In 2012, T.L.F. and T.E.F. visited Walt Disney World and was
admirably accommodated. During that visit, T.E.F. thoroughly
enjoyedtheDisneyParks.
900. ThisdrasticallychangedinOctoberof2013whenDisneyrolledout
theDisabilityAccessService.SinceDisney’sDAScardwasreleased,
T.L.F.hasreasonablybecometerrifiedof takingT.E.F. to theDisney
Parks.
901. T.E.F.’scognitive impairmentsmanifest themselves inacertainway
during her visits to theme parks; T.E.F. is compelled to experience
themeparks in a specific order, aswithother aspects of life. Also,
shecannottoleratearrivingatarideshehasherheartsetonriding,
onlytobetoldtocomebackatalatertime.Shecannotprocessthe
conceptofdeprivation in thepresent inexchange forreward in the
future. When such disruptions occur, each of which is a stressor,
T.E.F.willbegintostim.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 58 of 334 Page ID #:677
Page59
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
902. Over time, as is the casewith anymother of a cognitively disabled
child, T.L.F. has becomemuchmore familiarwithT.E.F.’s stressors.
She knows to protect T.E.F. from exactly the types of stressors to
which Disneywould subject her – idlewait times and inconsistent
andout‐of‐sequenceexperiences.Thefamilyhasoccasionallytested
T.E.F.’sabilitytoidlywaitinaqueueorrideridesindifferingorders
atotherthemeparks.IfT.E.F.wereaskedtoreturntoarideshehad
her heart set on riding in that moment, she would experience a
meltdown.
903. AfterOctober9,2013,T.L.F.learnedthatchildrensuchasherswere
no longer receiving the typeof accommodationandattentionT.L.F.
received at Disney Parks prior to October 9, 2013. Based on that
knowledgeandherknowledgeofT.E.F.,T.L.F.canceledherplanofa
summer2014triptoWaltDisneyWorld.
904. T.L.F. had been planning the trip toWalt DisneyWorld formonths
before she learnedofDisney’sDAS card.T.L.F. called in advance to
see if her children would be reasonably accommodated.When the
employee explained how the DAS works and how they could not
promisemore than the DAS, T.L.F. knew the tripwould be a futile
andwasteful;suchasystemwillnotaccommodateT.E.F.
905. T.L.F. canceled her family’s summer 2014 trip out of the reasoned
fear that their Disney experience will be a supremely un‐
accommodatingone.T.L.F.wouldbeinclinedtovisitDisneylandand
WaltDisneyWorldParkswithT.E.F.,hadDisneynotabandoned its
past policy of accommodating the special needs of persons with
cognitive impairments. Their interest in attending Disneyland and
WaltDisneyWorldParksissubstantiallyreduced.T.L.F.knowsthey
mustavoidattendingtheParks inthefuture,at leastwhiletheDAS
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 59 of 334 Page ID #:678
Page60
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
is in place, due to the reasoned expectation that T.E.F. will be
subjectedtodiscrimination.
906. T.L.F. remains concerned that visitingDisney ParkswithT.E.F.will
be a waste of her monetary resources, and an overall destructive
experienceforT.E.F.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.E.F., through T.L.F. as his Next Friend,
ParentandNaturalGuardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of T.E.F.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 60 of 334 Page ID #:679
Page61
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT85
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
A.J.F.v.Disney
907. PlaintiffA.J.F. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
908. A.J.F. is generally in the care of hismother, T.L.F., who brings this
actionasA.J.F.’snextfriend,parentandnaturalguardian.
909. A.J.F.andT.L.F.areresidentsofCanada.
910. A.J.F. is six years old. A.J.F. is diagnosed with autism spectrum
disorder.
911. In 2012, T.L.F. and A.J.F. visited Walt Disney World and was
admirably accommodated. During that visit, A.J.F. thoroughly
enjoyedtheDisneyParks.
912. ThisdrasticallychangedinOctoberof2013whenDisneyrolledout
their Disability Access Service. Since Disney’s DAS was released,
T.L.F. has reasonablybecome terrifiedof takingA.J.F. to theDisney
Parks.
913. A.J.F.’s cognitive impairmentsmanifest themselves in a certainway
during his visits to theme parks; A.J.F. likes to experience theme
parks in a specific order, traveling left around the park. Also, he
cannottoleratearrivingatarideheexpectstoberiding,onlytobe
toldtocomebackata latertime. Hecannotprocesstheconceptof
deprivation in the present in exchange for reward in the future.
Whensuchdisruptionsoccur,eachofwhich isastressor,A.J.F.will
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 61 of 334 Page ID #:680
Page62
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
begin to stim. A.J.F.’s stimming patterns include swaying, and
compulsive repetitive actions. As anxiety and stimming increase
intomeltdown,A.J.F.throwstantrums(crying,screaming,huffing).
914. Over time, as is the casewith anymother of a cognitively disabled
child, T.L.F. has become very familiar with A.J.F.’s stressors. She
knowsshemustprotectA.J.F. fromexactly the typesofstressors to
whichDisneywould subject him– idlewait times and inconsistent
ride order and experiences. The family has occasionally tested
A.J.F.’s ability to idly wait in a queue or to visit attractions in
differingordersatother themeparks. IfA.J.F.wereasked toreturn
to a ride he had his heart set on riding in thatmoment, he would
experienceameltdown.
915. AfterOctober9,2013,T.L.F.learnedthatchildrensuchasherswere
no longer receiving the typeof accommodationandattentionT.L.F.
receivedattheDisneyParkspriortoOctober9,2013.Basedonthat
knowledgeandherknowledgeofA.J.F.,T.L.F.canceledherplanofa
summer2014triptoWaltDisneyWorld.
916. T.L.F. had been planning the trip toWalt DisneyWorld formonths
before she learnedofDisney’sDAS card.T.L.F. called in advance to
see if her kids could be accommodated. When the employee
explained how the new system works and how they couldn’t
guaranteeaccommodatingthekids,T.L.F.decidednottogo.
917. Shehassincecanceledherfamily’ssummer2014tripoutofthefear
thattheirDisneyexperiencewillbeasupremelyun‐accommodating
one. T.L.F. would be more inclined to visit Disneyland and Walt
DisneyWorld Parkswith A.J.F., had Disney not abandoned its past
policyofaccommodatingthespecialneedsofpersonswithcognitive
impairments. Their interest in attending Disneyland and Walt
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 62 of 334 Page ID #:681
Page63
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
DisneyWorldParksissubstantiallyreduced.T.L.F.feelstheyshould
avoid attending the Parks in the future due to the expectation that
the experiencewill be an un‐magical, and overall, un‐fulfilling one,
andespeciallyduetotheriskthattheexperiencewillbedestructive
forA.J.F.
918. T.L.F.remainsconcernedthatvisitingDisneyParkswithA.J.F.willbe
a waste of her monetary resources, and an overall destructive
experienceforA.J.F.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff A.J.F., through T.L.F. as his Next Friend,
ParentandNaturalGuardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of A.J.F.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 63 of 334 Page ID #:682
Page64
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT86
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
R.J.R.G.v.Disney
919. Plaintiff R.J.R.G. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through
66,68,and651through654above.
920. R.J.R.G.hasbeendiagnosedwithautism.
921. R.J.R.G. becomes particularly upset when forced to idly wait for
extendedperiodsoftime,orwhenthereisanytypeofmodification
tohisusualroutines.
922. R.J.R.G. expresses his frustrations through behavioral meltdowns;
whichgenerally consistof screaming, flailinghishands, andyelling
highlymorbidsentimentsrelatingtohowhewantstodie.
923. R.J.R.G. is a person with a disability, pursuant to that term’s
definitionin42U.S.C.§12102(1).
924. R.J.R.G. is eight years of age and in the care of his mother, G.M.G.,
who brings this action as R.J.R.G.'s next friend, parent, and natural
guardian,andhisfather,J.M.G.
925. R.J.R.G.,G.M.G.,andJ.M.G.areresidentsofVolusiaCounty,Florida.
926. R.J.R.G.firstvisitedWaltDisneyWorldwithhisparentswhenhewas
11 months old. Thereafter, the family visited Walt Disney World
between 50 and 100 times, under theGuest Assistance Card (GAC)
program,andwerealwaysbeautifullyaccommodated.Duringthose
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 64 of 334 Page ID #:683
Page65
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
visits, R.J.R.G. exhibited a nature and extent of joy that he rarely
manifests in any other setting. G.M.G. and J.M.G. delighted in the
opportunitytobringtotheirbelovedsonalevelofhappinesswhich
hedoesnotexpressanywhereelse.
927. SinceR.J.R.G. first started visitingWalt DisneyWorld, his cognitive
impairmentshavemanifested themselves inaspecificway: R.J.R.G.
knows the entire Walt Disney World layout. He is compelled to
alwaysgoonthesamerides:TestTrackatEpcot,SplashMountainat
MagicKingdom,andToyStoryatHollywoodStudios.Anychangesor
disruptions in his routine will result in emotional and behavioral
meltdowns.
928. WheneverR.J.R.G.suffersthroughoneofhismeltdowns,hisparents
attempt to calmhimdown. When theydo so he reacts bypushing
them.Theseepisodesposeanextremelydifficultanduncomfortable
situationthatwouldbeavoidedifDisneystillaccommodatedguests
withdisabilitiessuchasR.J.R.G.asDisneywasabletodointhepast.
929. R.J.R.G. is also very likely to experience a meltdown when he is
requiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideorattractionformorethan
afewminutes. This isbecausehedoesnotunderstandtheconcept
ofwaiting;nordoeshe reactpositively tohavinga lot ofpeople in
closeproximityforextendedperiodsoftime.
930. BecauseR.J.R.G.’scognitivedisabilitydoesnotallowhimtograspthe
conceptofdelayedgratification,i.e.visitingarideorattraction,only
to be told that he cannot ride it until a later time, the new DAS
creates avoidable stressors for R.J.R.G. and significantly increases
the probability of experiencing a meltdown. In fact, since the
implementation of DAS, R.J.R.G. has actually experienced several of
thesemeltdownsatWaltDisneyWorld.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 65 of 334 Page ID #:684
Page66
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
931. When R.J.R.G. first visited Disney under the DAS, G.M.G. begged
employeesatCityHalltoletherobtainFastPassestosupplementthe
DAScard,sincesheknewthatthenewsystemwasnotgoingtowork
withR.J.R.G.
932. After theDAScame intoeffect, forR.J.R.G.,WaltDisneyWorldwent
from being his favorite place, to a complete nightmare. Despite
visitingtheparkssooftenduetotheirhome’srelativeproximityto
Walt Disney World, the family is considering ending such visits,
because of the alienating and discriminating treatment they have
beensubjectedtoundertheDAS.
933. Due to Disney’s recent refusal to provide individually tailored
accommodations forthebenefitofguestswithcognitivedisabilities
such asR.J.R.G., andDisney’s arbitrary and inflexibleDAS,which is
enforced regardless of the guest’s specific needs, R.J.R.G. has been
prevented fromexperiencing the full enjoymentof theParks to the
sameextenthehasenjoyedtheminthepast,andtothesameextent
affordedtopersonswithoutadisability.
934. After DAS went into effect, R.J.R.G. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionhereceivedpriortoOctober9,2013.
935. Alsodue toDisney’s refusal tomodify itsprocedures to reasonably
accommodateR.J.R.G.’sneeds,G.M.G.hasbeendeterredfromthefull
use and enjoyment of the park’s rides and attractions. As a
consequence, the family’s interest in continuing their visits toWalt
DisneyWorldhasbeenconsiderablyreduced.
936. If Disney had not abandoned its long standing practices of
welcoming and accommodating the special needs of guests with
cognitive impairments, R.J.R.G. and his parents would continue to
visittheParksasoftenastheydidintheprecedingsevenyears.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 66 of 334 Page ID #:685
Page67
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
937. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge and
awareness of the needs of persons with cognitive disabilities, and
notwithstanding Disney’s historic eagerness and ability to
accommodateR.J.R.G.’sspecialneeds,Disneypersonnelhaverefused
toconductanindividualizedassessmentofR.J.R.G.'scapacitytoavail
himself to the DAS policies; and tomodify DAS to allow R.J.R.G. to
enjoythesamebenefitsandprivilegesasnon‐disabledguests.
938. Disney employees have shownnowillingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeR.J.R.G.
939. G.M.G.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.J.R.G., by and through G.M.G., as R.J.R.G.'s
nextfriend,parent,andnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicate
thisdisputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiffonaccountofR.J.R.G.’sdisability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
andproceduresinordertoaffordPlaintiffwithanopportunityto
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhenshevisitstheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination regarding Disney’s remedial measures and
modified policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 67 of 334 Page ID #:686
Page68
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Plaintiff from visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated
discrimination;and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT87
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.J.R.G.v.Disney
940. Plaintiff R.J.R.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 920 through 939
above.
941. During one or more visits to the Parks, R.J.R.G. suffered actual
meltdowns.
942. R.J.R.G.’smeltdownsatWaltDisneyWorldwereproximatelycaused
byDisney’snegligent,unlawful,reckless,andarbitrarytreatmentof
R.J.R.G. during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material
times, Disney knew R.J.R.G. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if
treatedinsuchamanner.
943. R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns and the treatment which proximately caused
R.J.R.G. to experience them caused him grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 68 of 334 Page ID #:687
Page69
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.J.R.G., by and through G.M.G. as R.J.R.G.’s
nextfriend,parent,andnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicate
thisdisputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
R.J.R.G.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.J.R.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.J.R.G. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT88
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.J.R.G.v.Disney
944. Plaintiff R.J.R.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 920 through 939
above.
945. During one or more visits to the Parks, R.J.R.G. suffered actual
meltdowns.
946. R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns in the Parks were proximately caused by
Disney’s outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of R.J.R.G.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewR.J.R.G. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated
insuchamanner.
947. R.J.R.G.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
R.J.R.G. to experience them caused her grave and extreme mental
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 69 of 334 Page ID #:688
Page70
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.J.R.G., by and through G.M.G., as R.J.R.G.’s
nextfriend,parent,andnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicate
thisdisputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponR.J.R.G.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.J.R.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.J.R.G. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT89
BreachofContract
G.M.G.v.Disney
948. Plaintiff G.M.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 920 through 939
above.
949. G.M.G. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
950. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 70 of 334 Page ID #:689
Page71
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
951. G.M.G.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff G.M.G. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithG.M.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff G.M.G. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT90
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
G.M.G.v.Disney
952. Plaintiff G.M.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 920 through 939
above.
953. DuringoneormorevisitstotheParks,G.M.G.’sbelovedson,R.J.R.G.,
sufferedactualmeltdownswhileinG.M.G.’spresence.
954. R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns in the Parks were proximately caused by
Disney’s negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of
R.J.R.G. during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material
times, Disney knew R.J.R.G. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if
treatedinsuchamannerbyanyone.
955. G.M.G.directlyobserved thestressors leadingup to themeltdowns,
R.J.R.G.’s escalating frustration, and his resulting meltdowns.
Particularly in light of her trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 71 of 334 Page ID #:690
Page72
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
toward her son, G.M.G. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
956. G.M.G.’s observation of R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused R.J.R.G. to
experiencethemeltdowns,causedG.M.G.graveandextrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff G.M.G. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
G.M.G.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoG.M.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff G.M.G. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT91
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.M.G.v.Disney
957. Plaintiff J.M.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 920 through 939
above.
958. DuringoneormorevisitstotheParks, J.M.G.’sbelovedson,R.J.R.G.,
sufferedactualmeltdownswhileinJ.M.G.’spresence.
959. R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns in the Parks were proximately caused by
Disney’s negligent, unlawful, reckless, and arbitrary treatment of
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 72 of 334 Page ID #:691
Page73
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
R.J.R.G. during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material
times, Disney knew R.J.R.G. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if
treatedinsuchamannerbyanyone.
960. J.M.G. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
R.J.R.G.’s escalating distress, and his resulting meltdowns.
Particularly in light of his trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
toward his son, J.M.G. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
961. C.D.P’s witnessing of R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused R.J.R.G. to
experience themeltdowns, caused J.M.G. grave andextrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.M.G. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
J.M.G.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.M.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.M.G. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 73 of 334 Page ID #:692
Page74
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT92
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
G.M.G.v.Disney
962. Plaintiff G.M.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 920 through 939
above.
963. DuringoneormorevisitstotheParks,G.M.G.’sbelovedson,R.J.R.G.,
sufferedactualmeltdowns.
964. R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns in the Parks were proximately caused by
Disney’s outrageous, unlawful, and reckless treatment of R.J.R.G.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewR.J.R.G. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated
insuchamannerbyanyone.
965. G.M.G.directlyobserved thestressors leadingup to themeltdowns,
R.J.R.G.’s increasing distress, and his resulting meltdowns.
Particularly in light of her trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
toward her son, G.M.G. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
966. G.M.G.’s witnessing of R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused R.J.R.G. to
experiencethemeltdowns,causedG.M.G.graveandextrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff G.M.G. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponG.M.G.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 74 of 334 Page ID #:693
Page75
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoG.M.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff G.M.G. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT93
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.M.G.v.Disney
967. Plaintiff J.M.G. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 920 through 939
above.
968. DuringoneormorevisitstotheParks, J.M.G.’sbelovedson,R.J.R.G.,
sufferedactualmeltdowns.
969. R.J.R.G.’s meltdowns in the Parks were proximately caused by
Disney’s outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of R.J.R.G.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewR.J.R.G. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated
insuchamannerbyanyone.
970. J.M.G. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
R.J.R.G.’s increasing distress, and his resulting meltdowns.
Particularly in light of his trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
toward his son, J.M.G. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdown.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 75 of 334 Page ID #:694
Page76
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
971. J.M.G.’s witnessing of R.J.R.G.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused R.J.R.G. to
experience themeltdowns, caused J.M.G. grave andextrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.M.G. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponJ.M.G.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.M.G.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.M.G. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT94
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
P.H.G.v.Disney
972. PlaintiffP.H.G.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
973. P.H.G.hascerebralpalsy,seizuredisorderandanxiety. He is100%
disabled,asawheelchair‐boundquadriplegic. P.H.G.doesn’t speak,
walkormovehishands.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 76 of 334 Page ID #:695
Page77
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
974. P.H.G. is 22 years of age and is generally in the care of hismother,
E.G.R., who brings this action as P.H.G.’s court appointed
conservator,nextfriend,parentandnaturalguardian.
975. P.H.G.andE.G.R.areresidentsofSanBernardinoCounty,California.
976. E.G.R. was an annual passholder who, prior to October 9, 2013,
visitedDisneylandeverymonthalongwithP.H.G.andP.H.G.’sfather
andfourbrothers.Duringthosevisits,P.H.G.exhibitedanatureand
extentof joy thatherarelyshowed inanyothersetting. E.G.R.was
alwaysproudand joyfulof theopportunity tobring toherbeloved
childalevelofhappinesswhichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
977. P.H.G. is incapable of waiting in lines without his cognitive
impairmentscausinghimtoexperiencestimmingandmeltdownsor
beingatriskfromheatimposedanxietyandseizures.
978. On December 31, 2014, P.H.G. and his six family members visited
DisneylandandwaitedonalineatCityHallforoveranhourtogeta
DAS card. All seven family members had to wait on line as the
Disney employee claimed he had to see every family member in
orderforthepasstoincludethem.
979. AsaresultofthelongwaitatCityHall,P.H.G.andhisfamilydidnot
gettotheirfirstrideuntiltwohoursaftertheyenteredDisneyland.
980. P.H.G.wearsadisposableundergarment for incontinence thatmust
bechangedeverytwohours.
981. Based on themedical need to change P.H.G.’s undergarment, P.H.G.
missedareturnridetimeundertheDAS.Despiteexplainingthatto
employeeattheattraction,thepartywasrefusedaccesstotheride.
982. P.H.G.andhisfamilywerealsoturnedawayfromrides,includingthe
Peter Pan ride, when the party arrivedwith the DAS card to get a
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 77 of 334 Page ID #:696
Page78
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
returntimeandweretold“wearenotdoingtheDASrightnow,you
cancomebackwhenwestartdoingthem.”
983. Yet when E.G.R. inquired “when is that?” The Disney employee
responded,“wedon’tknow.”
984. Disneyfailedtoprovideanopportunitytoreturnandenjoytheride,
andindoingso,failedtoprovidetoP.H.G.afullopportunitytoenjoy
thepark,equaltothosewithoutadisability.
985. In fact,Disneyaffirmatively frustratedP.H.G.’sopportunity toenjoy
the park when a Disney employee sent away the party from the
SpaceMountainDASkioskand falsely told them thatonlyCityHall
couldprovideaSpaceMountainreturntimeintheirpassbook.
986. After being unnecessarily run around the park for 30 minutes in
order to get a ride time inhis passbook for SpaceMountain, P.H.G.
andhispartylearnedthattheinformationtheDisneyemployeegave
themwasfalse.TheyreceivedaridetimeforSpaceMountainatthe
kiosk for Buzz Lightyear which provided a return time that was
anothertwohourslater.
987. This scavenger hunt for a ride time was so stressful to P.H.G. and
caused so much anxiety that his entire body began to shake and
convulse.
988. Theproblemofridesbeinglessaccessibletothedisabledthantothe
restofthepopulationispervasiveandcontinuedduringP.H.G.’svisit
toCaliforniaAdventureParkinJanuary2014.
989. AtCaliforniaAdventure,P.H.G.’spartywasgivenatimetocomeback
but upon returning, the ridewas not open and a Disney employee
told the party they had to wait another prolonged period of time
untilanewly‐issuedpassbookreturntime.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 78 of 334 Page ID #:697
Page79
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
990. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant has
preventedP.H.G.fromexperiencingthefullenjoymentoftheDisney
Parks,equaltothosewithoutadisability.
991. In order to experience the facilities and services of Disney Parks
since the implementation of the DAS, P.H.G. is now forced to idly
stand in an extended‐duration line, enduring all potential anxiety
andseizuretriggers,atCityHalltohavehisphotographtakenanda
DisabilityAccessServiceCardmadeforhim.
992. Similarly, each time P.H.G. wants to experience Disneyland, he is
forced to idly wait amongst anxiety and seizure triggers, just to
obtainpassbookreturntimes.
993. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
fact that P.H.G.’s diagnosis will not change and his annual pass is
good for twelve months. The expiration of the DAS card after
approximately two weeks assures that each visit to the Parks will
beginwithstressors,notpleasures.
994. SinceDefendant’simplementationoftheDAS,P.H.G.andE.G.R.have
visited multiple Disney Parks, including Disneyland and California
Adventure Park onmultiple occasions, including but not limited to
visitsonDecember31,2013andJanuary,2014.
995. The new procedure triggers P.H.G.’s anxiety and seizure more
frequentlyattheDisneyParks.
996. TheaccommodationsDisneyclaimstoprovidethroughtheDASwill
not allow P.H.G. to utilize his annual pass in such a way that it
provides the equal enjoyment of theDisney Parks as that of a non
disabledperson.
997. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needsofpersonswithcognitive impairmentsandotherdisabilities,
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 79 of 334 Page ID #:698
Page80
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
and notwithstanding Disney’s historic ability to accommodate
P.H.G.’s special needs, Disney personnel now offered ineffective,
apathetic,obtuseresponses toE.G.R.’srecitationsregardingP.H.G.’s
needs.Thefurtherrefusetoconductanyindividualizedassessment
of P.H.G.’s accessibility needs, particularly whether Disney’s
inflexible application of the DAS can accommodate them. Disney’s
actions and statements are so contrary to Disney’s body of
knowledgeandtoDisney’shistoricperformancethatDisneycannot
haveaccidentallyproposedsuchabsurdities.
998. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeP.H.G.
999. E.G.R.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
thepark.
1000. The interest P.H.G. and E.G.R. have in attending Disney Parks is
substantiallyreduced.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffP.H.G.,byandthroughE.G.R.ashisnext
friend,parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of P.H.G.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 80 of 334 Page ID #:699
Page81
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT95
BreachofContract
E.G.R.v.Disney
1001. Plaintiff E.G.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs 1 through 66, 651 through 654, and 973 through 1000
above.
1002. E.G.R. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1003. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1004. E.G.R.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffE.G.R.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithE.G.R.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 81 of 334 Page ID #:700
Page82
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Entering judgment for Plaintiff E.G.R. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT96
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
P.H.G.v.Disney
1005. P.H.G. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and973through1000above.
1006. P.H.G.isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1007. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1008. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1009. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1010. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1011. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 82 of 334 Page ID #:701
Page83
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
P.H.G.’saccesstoDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
1012. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs P.H.G. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of P.H.G.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 83 of 334 Page ID #:702
Page84
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff P.H.G. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT97
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.W.Bv.Disney
1013. PlaintiffJ.W.B.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1014. J.W.B.hasbeendiagnosedwithcomplexautism.Hisverbalskillsare
very limited: J.W.B. communicates mostly either through behavior,
bywriting things down, or by having his parents offer him several
choices.
1015. WheneverJ.W.B.isfacedwithachangeinhisusualroutine,orwhen
he is forced to idly wait for extended periods of time, J.W.B.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 84 of 334 Page ID #:703
Page85
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
experiences severe meltdowns, which he expresses by punching
himselfonthehead,pinchinghimself,andpinchingfamilymembers
whoareincloseproximitytohim.
1016. J.W.B.isapersonwithadisability,pursuanttothatterm’sdefinition
in42U.S.C.§12102(1).
1017. J.W.B. is 22 years of age and in the care of hismother, N.F.B.,who
brings this action as J.W.B.'s next friend, parent, and natural
guardian,andhisfather,J.E.B.
1018. J.W.B.andhisfamilyareresidentsofHillsboroughCounty,Florida.
1019. J.W.B. visitedWaltDisneyWorld for the first timewithhisparents
whenhewasthreeyearsofage.Thereafter,J.W.B.,N.F.B., J.E.B.,and
their older son, V.J.B. frequently visited Disney, because the entire
family has always been Disney lovers, and they livewithin driving
distanceoftheFloridaparks.
1020. For most of his childhood and continuously into early adulthood,
J.W.B. visitedWaltDisneyWorldwithN.F.B., J.E.B., andV.J.B.under
the Guest Assistance Card system, and had been wonderfully
accommodated. During those visits, J.W.B. displayed a nature and
extentofjoythatherarelyexpressesinanyothersetting.
1021. J.W.B. fondness for Disney is so acute that he possess over 1,000
Disneymovies. Over one hundred of them are of Peter Pan. Every
time the family goes on vacation, or even on short family outings,
J.W.B. takessomeof themovieswithhim.Even ifhe isnotgoingto
watchthem,helikescarryingthemaround.IfJ.W.B.hastowakeup
earlyanddoesnotwanttogetoutofbed,allN.F.B.hastodoiswalk
over to his Disney movie collection and start touching them, and
J.W.B.willgetup. Whenhewasinschool,J.W.B.wouldalwaystake
someofthefilmsinhisbackpack.Thefamily’sfrequenttripstoWalt
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 85 of 334 Page ID #:704
Page86
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Disney World used to be genuinely fun outings for J.W.B and his
brother;and J.W.B.askedhisparents tovisit theparkseveryweek;
sometimes even twice a week. N.F.B. acquiesced, because she
delightedintheopportunitytoprovidetoherbelovedsonsalevelof
happinesswhichtheydonotgettoexperienceelsewhere.
1022. For the past twenty years, N.F.B. purchase annual passes to Walt
DisneyWorld, allowing the family to visit as often as theywished.
J.W.B. rarely experienced any behavioral meltdowns because the
GACaccommodatedJ.W.Bremarkablywell.
1023. Since J.W.B. was a small child, his cognitive impairments have
manifested themselves in a very distinct way during the family’s
visits to Disney. Before each trip, J.W.B. plans the specific order in
which he must experience the rides, and how many times he will
enjoy each one.On someoccasions, he decides hewill just go on a
singleriderepeatedly,untilhegets tiredof it.Anyvariations inhis
prearrangedplanwillculminateinameltdown.
1024. Whenever J.W.B. experiences one of his meltdowns, his parents
attempt to do everything possible to calmhimdown, but it is very
difficult to do so, especially when he begins pinching his parents
veryhard.
1025. J.W.B has the same overwhelming reaction when he is required to
waitforentryintoarideorattractionformorethanafewminutes.
1026. BecauseJ.W.B.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitinga
ride or attraction only to be prohibited from riding it until a later
time, the new DAS creates stressors which significantly increase
J.W.B.’s potential for meltdown. J.W.B.’s family was able to avert
thesestressorsunderDisney’spriorGuestDisabilityCard.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 86 of 334 Page ID #:705
Page87
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1027. DuetoDisney’srecentrefusaltoaccommodateguestswithcognitive
disabilitiessuchasJ.W.B.,andDisney’s inflexibleenforcementof its
arbitrary new DAS, which is adhered to regardless of the guest’s
specificneeds, J.W.B.hasbeenpreventedfromexperiencingthe full
enjoyment of the Parks, to the same extent afforded to persons
withoutadisability.
1028. After DAS went into effect, J.W.B. no longer received the type of
accommodation and attention he had received when visiting the
Parks in the past. As a consequence, the family’s interest in
continuing their regular trips to Walt Disney World has been
considerably reduced. This is problematic because J.W.B andV.J.B.
have grown up accustomed to visiting Disney very frequently, and
theystillaskN.F.B.foradditionaldaytrips.
1029. IfDisneyhadnotabandoneditstime‐honoredpracticeofwelcoming
and accommodating guests with cognitive impairments, J.W.B.,
N.F.B., J.E.B, andV.J.Bwould continue to visit theParks as often as
theyhaveoverthepasttwodecades.N.F.B.knowsthefamilycanno
longerregularlyvisitWaltDisneyWorldbecauseJ.W.B.willagainbe
subjectedtothediscriminationthatisbuiltintotheDAS.
1030. Notwithstanding Disney’s exceptionally sophisticated knowledge
and awareness of the necessities of persons with cognitive
impairments, and despite their long‐established eagerness to
accommodate J.W.B.’s specialneeds,Disneypersonnelhave refused
toconductanindividualizedassessmentof J.W.B.'scapacitytoavail
himselftothenewDASpolicies,andtomodifythemwhennecessary,
inordertoallowJ.W.B.toenjoybenefitsandprivilegestothesame
extentasnon‐disabledguests.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 87 of 334 Page ID #:706
Page88
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1031. Disney employees have shownnowillingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeJ.W.B.
1032. N.F.B. incurred expenses associated with the family’s wasted trips
fortheParks,includingbutnotlimitedtothecostsofacaretakerto
go to the Parks with J.W.B. when neither of the parents could
accompanyhim.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.W.B., by and through N.F.B., as J.W.B.'s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.W.B.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
andproceduresinordertoaffordPlaintiffwithanopportunityto
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhenshevisitstheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination regarding Disney’s remedial measures and
modified policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring
Plaintiff from visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated
discrimination;and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 88 of 334 Page ID #:707
Page89
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT98
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
V.J.B.v.Disney
1033. PlaintiffV.J.B. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1034. Just like his brother, J.W.B, V.J.B. has been diagnosedwith complex
autism. Also like his brother, J.W.B., V.J.B’s verbal skills are
extremelylimited:V.J.B.communicateswithafewwords,butmostly
throughbehavior,bywriting thingsdown,orbyhavinghisparents
offerhimseveralchoices.
1035. When V.J.B. has to idly wait for extended periods of time, he
experiencesemotionalmeltdowns,whichheexpressesbycryingand
wailing in an intense and boisterous way. Despite his parents’
attempts to subdue him, V.J.B. will not calm down until he is done
fullyexperiencinghismeltdown.
1036. V.J.B. isapersonwithadisability,pursuant to the term’sdefinition
under42U.S.C.§12102(1).
1037. V.J.B. is 23 years of age and in the care of hismother, N.F.B., who
brings this action as V.J.B.'s next friend, parent, and natural
guardian,andhisfather,J.E.B.
1038. V.J.B.andhisfamilyareresidentsofHillsboroughCounty,Florida.
1039. V.J.B. first visitedWalt DisneyWorldwith his parents and brother
J.W.B.whenhewasfouryearsofage.Thereafter,V.J.B.,N.F.B.,J.E.B.,
and J.W.B. frequently returned to theDisneyParks, since theentire
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 89 of 334 Page ID #:708
Page90
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
family has been lifelong Disney lovers, and live within driving
distanceoftheparks.
1040. For most of his childhood and continuously into early adulthood,
V.J.B. has visited Walt Disney World with N.F.B., J.E.B., and J.W.B.
with the Guest Assistance Card, and has been beautifully
accommodated. Duringthosevisits,V.J.B.exhibitedanextentof joy
andexhilarationthatherarelyexpressesinanyothersetting.
1041. In fact, just like his brother J.W.B, V.J.B. as a devotedDisney lover.
V.J.B.alsohasanextensivecollectionofDisneymovies. Everytime
the family goes on vacation, or even on short family outings, V.J.B.
takes someof themovieDVDswithhim towatchonhis computer.
Throughout his life, the family’s visits to Walt Disney World have
beenfun‐filledtripsforV.J.B.andhisbrother.Thetripsoccurredon
a weekly basis, sometimes even more often. N.F.B. acquiesced,
becauseshedelightedintheopportunitytobringtohersonsalevel
ofjoywhichtheydonotgettoexperienceanywhereelse.
1042. For the past twenty years, N.F.B. purchased annual passes toWalt
DisneyWorld, allowing the family to visit as often as theywished.
V.J.B. seldom experienced any meltdowns because the Guess
AssistanceCardaccommodatedhimandhisbrotherwonderfully.
1043. Since V.J.B. was a small child, his cognitive impairments have
manifestedthemselvesinaspecificwayduringthefamily’svisitsto
the Disney Parks. Before each trip, his brother J.W.B. planned the
precise order in which he wants to experience the rides, and how
many timeshewill enjoy eachone.V.J.B. ismore subdued thanhis
brother,butanychangesinthepre‐arrangedroutinewillalsoresult
inV.J.B.experiencingameltdown.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 90 of 334 Page ID #:709
Page91
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1044. V.J.B.wouldalsoreactwithameltdownifhe isrequiredtowait for
entryintoarideorattractionformorethanafewminutes.
1045. Because V.J.B. does not comprehend the concept of delayed
gratification, i.e., visiting a ride or attraction, only to be prohibited
fromridingituntilalatertime,theDAScreatesavoidablestressors
forhim,whichsignificantly increasetheprobabilityofexperiencing
ameltdown.
1046. Due to Disney’s refusal to furnish accommodations individually
tailored to the needs of guests with cognitive disabilities such as
V.J.B., andDisney’s inflexibleenforcementof its arbitrarynewDAS,
whichisadheredtoregardlessoftheguest’sspecificneeds,V.J.B.has
beenpreventedfromfullyenjoyingtheParkstothesameextentthat
hehasbeenusedtothroughouthisentirelifewhengoingtoDisney,
and to the same extent afforded to persons without any type of
disability.
1047. AftertheDASwentintoeffect,N.F.B.hasbeenhesitanttotakeV.J.B.
to Disney, because her younger son, J.W.B., visited Hollywood
Studios under the new system, along with a caretaker, and his
experiencesweresounfavorable,thatN.F.B.doesnotwanttoexpose
V.J.B. to the same alienating treatment. As a consequence, N.F.B.’s
interest in continuing their customary trips to Walt Disney World
haswanedextensively.Aswithhisbrother,J.W.B.,thisposesavery
difficultsituationforthefamily,becauseJ.W.BandV.J.B.havegrown
upusedtovisitingtheDisneyParksonaweeklybasis,andV.J.B.still
asksN.F.B.foradditionalvisits.
1048. IfDisneyhadnotabandoneditstime‐honoredpracticeofwelcoming
and accommodating guests with cognitive impairments, J.W.B.,
N.F.B., J.E.B, andV.J.Bwould continue to visit theParks as often as
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 91 of 334 Page ID #:710
Page92
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
theyhaveoverthepasttwodecades.N.F.B.knowsthefamilycanno
longerregularlyvisitWaltDisneyWorldbecauseV.J.B.willagainbe
subjectedtothediscriminationthatisbuiltintotheDAS.
1049. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge and
experience with the necessities of persons with cognitive
impairments, and despite their historic eagerness and ability to
accommodateV.J.B.’sspecialneeds,Disneypersonnelhasrefusedto
conduct an individualized assessment of V.J.B.'s capacity to avail
himself to the DAS policies, and to modify DAS to allow V.J.B. to
enjoythebenefitsandprivilegestothesameextentasnon‐disabled
guests.
1050. Disney employees have shown no willingness or inclination to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeV.J.B.
1051. N.F.B.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff V.J.B., by and through N.F.B., as V.J.B.'s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of V.J.B.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
andproceduresinordertoaffordPlaintiffwithanopportunityto
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhenshevisitstheDisneyParks;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 92 of 334 Page ID #:711
Page93
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination regarding Disney’s remedial measures and
modified policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring
Plaintiff from visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated
discrimination;and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT99
BreachofContract
N.F.B.v.Disney
1052. Plaintiff N.F.B. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1014through1032,and
1034through1051above.
1053. N.F.B. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1054. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1055. N.F.B. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththe family’swastedtripto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffN.B.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithN.F.B.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 93 of 334 Page ID #:712
Page94
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Entering judgment for Plaintiff N.F.B. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT100
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
G.H.v.Disney
1056. Plaintiff G.H. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 66,
68,and651through654above.
1057. G.H. has Asperger’s syndrome, sensory integration dysfunction,
bipolar disorder, fibromyalgia, asthma, scoliosis, depression,
anxiety, orthostatic hypotension (dizzy spells), irritable bowel
syndrome,andTypeIIdiabetes.
1058. G.H.is19yearsofage,6’2”,250pounds,andisgenerallyinthecare
of his mother, J.H., who brings this action as G.H.’s next friend,
parentandnaturalguardian.
1059. G.H.andJ.H.areresidentsofLosAngelesCounty,California.
1060. G.H.andJ.H.wereannualpassholderswho,priortoOctober9,2013,
regularly visited Disneyland and Disney’s California Adventure.
Duringthosevisits,G.H.exhibitedanatureandextentofjoythathe
rarelyshowedinanyothersetting.J.H.wasalwaysproudandjoyful
oftheopportunitytobringtoherbelovedchildalevelofhappiness
whichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
1061. G.H. is incapable of idly standing in extended lines without his
cognitive impairments causing him to experience stimming and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 94 of 334 Page ID #:713
Page95
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
meltdownswhenrequiredtowaitinalineforanysignificantperiod.
Triggers will cause G.H. to exhibit stimming behaviors including
flappinghisarmsandhittinghimself.
1062. In addition, G.H.’s sensory integration dysfunction causes him to
dislike others touching or getting too close to him. This causes
irritationandaggressivebehavior.
1063. Before G.H. went to Disneyland on October 25, 2013, J.H. wrote to
Disney to inquire about the effect of the DAS on her son and his
disability.ShecommunicatedthatG.H.cannottolerateextendedidle
waits in lines. In response, J.H. was told that Disney has long
recognizedthatpeoplehavedifferentneeds,andthatDisneywould
continue towork individuallywith their guestswith disabilities to
provideassistancethat isresponsivetotheiruniquecircumstances.
She was also told to visit Guest Relations at any of the Parks to
discuss her individual situation. Disney further assured J.H. that
Disneywouldworkwith J.H. to accommodateG.H. and the family’s
specificneeds.
1064. Disneyalsorepresentedthat inadditionto theDAS,supplementary
FastPassesmaybeavailabletoG.H.atGuestRelations. J.H.wasnot
toldthatwiththeDAS,J.H.wouldhavetocheckinattherideandbe
givenatimetocomeback,andthenstillhavetowaitinline.
1065. Based on Disney’s assurances, J.H. renewed the annual passes and
the family visited the Disneyland on October 11, 2013 and on
October25,2013.
1066. During theOctober11visit, J.H.andG.H.waited in line forover30
minutesatDisney’sCaliforniaAdventure, inorder tospeakwithan
employee about the DAS program. G.H. was on the verge of a
completemeltdownasaresultofthewait,thenoise,andthenumber
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 95 of 334 Page ID #:714
Page96
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
ofpeoplepresentatGuestRelations. J.H.andG.H.endedup leaving
theparkbecauseG.H.washighlyagitated.
1067. During theOctober25 visit, J.H. took thedayoffwork, hoping that
the DASwouldwork better on a less crowded day. However, once
again, at Guest Relations at Disney’s California Adventure, G.H.
became agitated. Because Disney refused to provide any type of
accommodation for her son, J.H. said she wanted to cancel her
annualpasses.
1068. In order to experience the facilities and services of Disney Parks
since the implementation of the DAS, G.H. was forced to begin his
day by idly standing in an extended‐duration line, enduring all
potential meltdown triggers, at City Hall to have his photograph
takenandaDASCardmadeforhim.
1069. Similarly, each time G.H. wanted to experience Disneyland, he was
forcedto idlywaitamongsttriggeraftertrigger forreturntimeson
eachride,whichlimitedtheorderinwhichhecouldexperiencethe
rides.
1070. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
factthatG.H.’sdiagnosiswillnotchangeandtheannualpassisgood
for twelve months. The expiration of the DAS card after
approximately two weeks assures that each visit to the Parks will
beginwithstressors,notpleasures.
1071. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant has
preventedG.H.fromexperiencingthefullenjoyment,equaltothose
withoutadisability,oftheDisneyParks.
1072. TheaccommodationsDisneyclaimstoprovidethroughtheDASwill
notallowG.H.toexperienceequalenjoymentoftheDisneyParksas
thatofanondisabledperson.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 96 of 334 Page ID #:715
Page97
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1073. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’shistoricabilitytoaccommodateG.H.’sspecialneeds,Disney
personnel now offered ineffective, apathetic, obtuse responses to
J.H.’srecitationsregardingG.H.’sneeds.Disneyrefusestoconductan
individualized assessment of the DAS’s inability to accommodate
G.H.’s accessibility needs. Disney’s actions and statementswere so
contrary to Disney’s body of knowledge and to Disney’s historic
performance that Disney cannot have accidentally proposed such
absurdities.
1074. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improve the experience for guests like G.H. despite the advanced
noticetheyreceivedofG.H.’sneedsforaccommodations.
1075. J.H. incurred expenses associated with the family’s wasted trips to
Disneyland. Some costs were reimbursed after she cancelled the
family’sannualpassesat thetimeof theOctober25visit,butmany
costsremainunreimbursed.
1076. G.H. and J.H. have not returned to the Disney Parks since J.H
cancelledtheirannualpassesonOctober25.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffG.H.,byandthroughJ.H.ashisnextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiffonaccountofG.H.’sdisability;and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 97 of 334 Page ID #:716
Page98
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT101
BreachofContract
J.H.v.Disney
1077. Plaintiff J.H. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1057through1076
above.
1078. J.H. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1079. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1080. J.H. incurred expenses associated with the family’s wasted trips to
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 98 of 334 Page ID #:717
Page99
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.H.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithJ.H.;and
EnteringjudgmentforPlaintiffJ.H.intheamountofhereconomic
monetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT102
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
G.H.v.Disney
1081. G.H. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1020through1039above.
1082. G.H. is and at allmaterial times has been a disabled personwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1083. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1084. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1085. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 99 of 334 Page ID #:718
Page100
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1086. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1087. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
G.H.’s access to Disney’s programs, services and activities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
1088. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs G.H. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of G.H.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 100 of 334 Page ID #:719
Page101
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff G.H. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT103
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.S.H.v.Disney
1089. Plaintiff J.S.H. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1090. J.S.H.hasautismpervasivedevelopmentdisorder.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 101 of 334 Page ID #:720
Page102
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1091. J.S.H. is19yearsof age. He stands6’3’’ tall. He is generally in the
care of his mother, S.J.H., who brings this action as J.S.H.’s parent,
nextfriendandCourt‐AppointedCo‐Guardian.
1092. J.S.H.andS.J.H.areresidentsofScottCounty,Kentucky.
1093. Since J.S.H. was six years old, and until October 9, 2013, J.S.H. and
S.J.H. visitedWalt DisneyWorld every two or three years. During
those visits, J.S.H. exhibited a nature and extent of joy that S.J.H.
rarely showed in any other setting. S.J.H. was always proud and
joyful of the opportunity to bring to her beloved child a level of
happinesswhichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
1094. Becauseofthesefondmemories,J.S.H.andS.J.H.visitedWaltDisney
WorldinMarch2014.
1095. J.S.H. is incapable of idly standing in lines for more than a few
minutes without his cognitive impairments causing him to
experience anxiety, stimming, and ultimately meltdowns. Triggers
willcauseJ.S.H.tohithimself.
1096. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant has
preventedJ.S.H.fromexperiencingthefullenjoyment,equaltothose
withoutadisability,oftheDisneyParks.
1097. In order to experience the facilities and services of Disney Parks
since the implementation of the DAS, J.S.H. is now forced to idly
standinanextended‐durationline,enduringallpotentialtriggers,at
CityHalltohavehisphotographtakenandaDASmadeforhim.
1098. Similarly,eachtimeJ.S.H.wantstoexperienceWaltDisneyWorldhe
is forced to idlywait amongst trigger after trigger for return times
on each ridewhich limit the order inwhich he can experience the
rides.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 102 of 334 Page ID #:721
Page103
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1099. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
fact that J.S.H.’s diagnosiswill not. The expiration of theDAS card
afterapproximatelytwoweeksassuresthatateachvisittotheParks
willbeginwithstressors,notpleasures.
1100. Since Disney’s implementation of the DAS, J.S.H. and S.J.H. have
visited multiple Disney sites between March 10‐14, 2014. During
that time the family complained to various Walt Disney World
managers.
1101. S.J.H.’s husband spoke to Darlene at Guest Relations in connection
with J.S.H’s disabilities. Prior to October 9, 2013, S.J.H. brought a
doctor’s letter describing J.S.H.s need for accommodations. On the
March10,2014visit,Disneyrefused to lookat the letter, soS.J.H.’s
husband had to emphasize to Darlene J.S.H.’s inability to wait on
lines. Darleneprovided threeFastPasses, alongwith theDAS card,
andstatedthatS.J.Hcouldnotdemandthesepassesatotherparks.
1102. Amember of S.J.H.’s party replied that theywere not “demanding”
butratheraskingforhelp.
1103. J.S.H. tried to use theDAS pass, but thewait timeswere so long, it
was difficult to redirect J.S.H and distract him while they were
waiting.Asaresult,hehadseveralmeltdownsinthepark.
1104. ThenewDASproceduretriggersstimmingbehaviorsandmeltdowns
inJ.S.H.atWaltDisneyWorld.
1105. Providing an accommodation one time will not assure J.S.H. the
equal enjoyment of the Disney Parks as that of a non‐disabled
person.
1106. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate J.S.H.’s special needs,
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 103 of 334 Page ID #:722
Page104
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Disney personnel now offered ineffective, apathetic, obtuse
responses to S.J.H.’s recitations regarding J.S.H.’s needs. Disney
refuses to conduct an individualized assessment of J.S.H.’s
accessibility needs or of the DAS’s ability to accommodate them.
Disney’sactionsandstatementsaresocontrarytoDisney’sbodyof
knowledgeandtoDisney’shistoricperformancethatDisneycannot
haveaccidentallyproposedsuchabsurdities.
1107. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeJ.S.H.
1108. S.J.H. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
1109. J.S.H.andS.J.H.willnotconsiderfuturetripstoDisneyParksaslong
as the DAS is in place. Their interest in attending Disney Parks is
substantiallyreduced.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.S.H.,byandthroughS.J.H.ashisparentand
naturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdisputeandenter
anOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.S.H.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 104 of 334 Page ID #:723
Page105
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT104
BreachofContract
S.J.H.v.Disney
1110. Plaintiff S.J.H. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1090through1109
above.
1111. S.J.H. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1112. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1113. S.J.H. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffS.J.H.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithS.J.H.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 105 of 334 Page ID #:724
Page106
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Entering judgment for Plaintiff S.J.H. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT105
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.S.H.v.Disney
1114. Plaintiff J.S.H. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1090through1109
above.
1115. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.S.H. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1116. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.S.H.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1117. J.S.H.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofJ.S.H.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewJ.S.H. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated in sucha
mannerbyanyone.
1118. J.S.H.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.S.H.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.S.H., by and through S.J.H. as J.S.H.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 106 of 334 Page ID #:725
Page107
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
J.S.H.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.S.H.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.S.H. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT106
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.S.H.v.Disney
1119. Plaintiff J.S.H. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1090through1109
above.
1120. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.S.H. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1121. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.S.H.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1122. J.S.H.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.S.H. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.S.H.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
1123. J.S.H.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.S.H.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 107 of 334 Page ID #:726
Page108
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.S.H., by and through S.J.H. as J.S.H.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponJ.S.H.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.S.H.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.S.H. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT107
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.T.I.v.Disney
1124. Plaintiff J.T.I. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 66,
68,and651through654above.
1125. J.T.I.hasautismspectrumdisorderandsensorydisorder.
1126. J.T.I. is 14 years of age and is generally in the care of hermother,
K.J.I.,whobringsthisactionasJ.T.I.’snextfriend,parentandnatural
guardian.
1127. J.T.I.andK.J.I.areresidentsofCanada.
1128. Prior to October 9, 2013, J.T.I. and K.J.I. visitedWalt DisneyWorld
twice since J.T.I. was seven years old. During those visits, J.T.I.
exhibitedanatureandextentof joy that J.T.I. rarelyshowed inany
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 108 of 334 Page ID #:727
Page109
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
othersetting. K.J.I.wasalwaysproudand joyfulof theopportunity
to bring to her beloved child a level of happinesswhich she rarely
showedelsewhere.
1129. Becauseof these fondmemories, J.T.I. andK.J.I. visitedWaltDisney
WorldonoraboutNovember2013.
1130. J.T.I. is incapable of standing in lines without her cognitive
impairments causing her to experience anxiety, stimming and
meltdownswhenrequiredtowaitinalineforasubstantialperiodof
time. Triggers will cause J.T.I. to present verbal and physical
stimming including arm flapping, yelling, screaming, or complete
shutdowncausinghertozoneout.
1131. J.T.I. is unable to wait in line. She does not have the capacity to
comprehend why she cannot promptly have what she sees and
wants. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant
has prevented J.T.I. from experiencing the full enjoyment of the
DisneyParks,equaltothosewithoutadisability.
1132. InordertoexperiencethefacilitiesandservicesoftheDisneyParks
sincetheimplementationoftheDAS,J.T.I.isnowforcedtoidlystand
inanextended‐duration line,enduringallpotential triggers, atCity
HalltohaveherphotographtakenandaDisabilityAccessCardmade
forher.
1133. Similarly,eachtimeJ.T.I.wantstoexperienceWaltDisneyWorldshe
is forced to idlywait amongst trigger after trigger for return times
oneach ridewhich limit theorder inwhichshecanexperience the
rides.
1134. J.T.I. needs to experience Disney Parks by repeating ridesmultiple
times,aprocesstheDASeliminates.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 109 of 334 Page ID #:728
Page110
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1135. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
factthatJ.T.I.’sdiagnosiswillnotchange.TheexpirationoftheDAS
cardafterapproximatelytwoweeksassuresthatwitheveryvacation
J.T.I.hastostandinlinetoreceiveanewDAScardandbesubjected
topotentialtriggers.
1136. SinceDisney’simplementationoftheDAS,J.T.I.andK.J.I.havevisited
DisneyParksand ridesandattractions. InNovemberof2013 they
complained to various Disney representatives regarding their
experiences in Walt Disney World. The complaints included
feedbackprovidedinawrittensurvey.
1137. Thenewprocedure triggersmeltdowns for J.T.I.more frequentlyat
theDisneyParks.
1138. During her November 2013 visit, J.T.I. waited 55 minutes to ride
PiratesoftheCaribbean.Whengivenareturntimetocomebackin
45 minutes, J.T.I. said “boat ride, I wanna go on the boat ride”,
startedflappingherarmsandhadameltdown.K.J.I.tookJ.T.I.away
and tried todistracther.Whentheywentback to theride, theride
wassobackedupthereturntimeswereoffandtheystillhadtowait
inline. J.T.I.waited45minutestogetbackinline,andthenwaited
another 20 more minutes. J.T.I. had a second meltdown while
waitinginline.Therestofthedayprogressedinsamefashion.
1139. More severemeltdowns were provoked by the DAS on the second
day,atExpeditionEverest.Therewasa90‐minutewait for theYeti
ride.When the 90minutes passed, the ride broke down, and J.T.I.
suffered ameltdown. When J.T.I.was finally able to ride enter the
ride, her need for repetition caused her to want to ride it again.
UnabletodobytheDAS,stillanothermeltdownensued.Thefamily
gaveupandlefttheParkearlierthanplanned.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 110 of 334 Page ID #:729
Page111
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1140. K.J.I. complained toDisney staff and reasonably concluded the staff
just didn’t care. The Disney employees were rude about K.J.I.’s
concerns,includingevenwhenK.J.I.hadtoreturntoGuestRelations
at Hollywood Studios to obtain a corrected DAS card, which the
Disneyemployeeshadoriginally createdwith thewrongexpiration
date.
1141. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’shistoricabilitytoaccommodateJ.T.I.’sspecialneeds,Disney
personnel now offered ineffective, apathetic, obtuse responses to
K.J.I.’s recitations regarding J.T.I.’s needs. Their actions were so
contrary to Disney’s body of knowledge and to Disney’s historic
performance that Disney cannot have accidentally proposed such
absurdities.
1142. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeJ.T.I.
1143. K.J.I. incurredexpensesassociatedwith the family’swasted trips to
theParks.
WHEREFORE,Plaintiff J.T.I., byand throughK.J.I. asherparent and
natural guardian, prays that this Court adjudicate this dispute and enter
anOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.T.I.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 111 of 334 Page ID #:730
Page112
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT108
BreachofContract
K.J.I.v.Disney
1144. Plaintiff K.J.I. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1125through1143
above.
1145. K.J.I. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1146. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1147. K.J.I. incurredexpensesassociatedwith the family’swasted trips to
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 112 of 334 Page ID #:731
Page113
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffK.J.I.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithK.J.I.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff K.J.I. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT109
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.T.I.v.Disney
1148. Plaintiff J.T.I. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1125through1143
above.
1149. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.T.I. suffered actual
meltdowns.
1150. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.T.I.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1151. J.T.I.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful, recklessandarbitrarytreatmentof J.T.I.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knew J.T.I. tobe vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in sucha
mannerbyanyone.
1152. J.T.I.’smeltdown and the treatmentwhich proximately caused J.T.I.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 113 of 334 Page ID #:732
Page114
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.T.I., by and through K.J.I. as J.T.I.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
J.T.I.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.T.I.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.T.I. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT110
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.T.I.v.Disney
1153. Plaintiff J.T.I. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1125through1143
above.
1154. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.T.I. suffered actual
meltdowns.
1155. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.T.I.’s meltdowns
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1156. J.T.I.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.T.I. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.T.I.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 114 of 334 Page ID #:733
Page115
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1157. J.T.I.’smeltdownsandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.T.I.
toexperiencethemeltdownscausedhimgraveandextrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.T.I., by and through K.J.I. as J.T.I.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponJ.T.I.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.T.I.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.T.I. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT111
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
C.J.J.v.Disney
1158. Plaintiff C.J.J. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 66,
68,and651through654above.
1159. C.J.J. has autism and also suffers from hydrocephalus and cranial
cysts. C.J.J.’s symptoms and stimming patterns include verbal
humming, repetitious storytelling, and hand gestures including
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 115 of 334 Page ID #:734
Page116
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
pretendinghe is drawingpictures in the airwithhis finger. C.J.J.’s
behaviormeltdownsaremildandnon‐physical.
1160. C.J.J.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
1161. C.J.J. iseightyearsofageand isgenerally in thecareofhismother,
C.R.J.,whobringsthisactionasC.J.J.’snextfriend,parentandnatural
guardian.
1162. C.R.J.andC.J.J.areresidentsofPinellasCounty,Florida.
1163. Prior to October of 2013, C.J.J. and C.R.J. visited the Walt Disney
WorldParksannually,takinghisfirsttriptotheDisneyParkswhen
hewasfiveyearsold.C.R.J.hadgrownupaDisneyloverandwanted
to share her own pleasurable experiences with her children. C.J.J.
carried the Guest Assistance Card (GAC) and was admirably
accommodated–thesewerethemostwonderfultimestheyhadever
had.C.J.J.exhibitedanatureandextentofjoythatherarelyshowed
inanyothersetting. C.R.J.wasproudand joyfulof theopportunity
to bring to her beloved son a level of happiness which he rarely
showedelsewhere.
1164. C.J.J.’s cognitive impairmentsmanifest themselves in a certainway
duringhisvisits to theparks. He is incapableofunderstandingthe
concept of visiting a ride or attraction only to be prohibited from
ridingituntilafuturetime.C.J.J.doesnotunderstandtheconceptof
waitingorhavingtoreturntoaridetorideitlater.InstructingC.J.J.
toendureanextendedwait,ortocomebackatanothertime,asthe
DAS requires, exposes C.J.J. to otherwise avoidable stressors, thus
increasingthechanceshewillexperienceameltdown.
1165. During those trips, the family’svisits to theDisneyParksstartedat
Guest Relations. Disney employees were cordial and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 116 of 334 Page ID #:735
Page117
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
accommodating; C.R.J. never had to prove C.J.J. is autistic, and she
never felt the Disney employees’ suspicion to the contrary. The
familyquicklyobtainedtheGACforC.J.J.andspenttheremainderof
the day enjoying rides and attractions, usually using the FastPass
accessline.
1166. They did not request, require, or receive instant‐front‐of‐the‐line
access – they simplywere given access to the FastPass line, and in
turn, less waiting time and less stimuli and stressors which could
lead to C.J.J. experiencing a meltdown. This policy accommodated
C.J.J.’s special need because if C.J.J. were required to idly wait for
entry intoa rideorattraction formore thana fewminutes,healso
wouldlikelymeltdown.
1167. C.J.J.’s disorder leaves with an inescapable need to experience
certain Disney attractions repetitively. C.J.J. is a “repeat rider,” a
propensity commonamong autistic persons – a variety of theneed
forconsistency,orderandroutine.C.J.J.willexperienceaparticular
rideorattraction,suchas theBigThunderMountainRailroad,over
and over, for several hours at a time. Disney personnel are very
familiarwiththerepeatridertypeofguest.
1168. DASincreasesthetimethatmustbespentwalkingaroundthepark,
intheheat,waitingtoridearide.ThisexposesC.J.J.totheadditional
riskof sufferingheatexhaustion, especiallywithhishydrocephalus
andcranialcysts.
1169. Under the GAC, C.J.J. and C.R.J. almost always had a calm and
pleasurable experience at the Disney Parks. The opposite is true
undertheDAS.
1170. For C.R.J. and C.J.J., the disappointment started in March of 2014,
whentheyvisitedWaltDisneyWorldforC.R.J.’sdaughter’sbirthday.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 117 of 334 Page ID #:736
Page118
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1171. WhenC.R.J.andC.J.J.arrived,theywereencountereda lineatGuest
Relations. After a 30‐minutewait, theywere told by an employee
thatDisneywouldnotandcouldnotprovideanyaccommodationfor
C.J.J.otherthantheexistingDASpolicy.
1172. C.R.J.returnedtoherhotelintears,upsetthattheyhadwastedatrip
toWaltDisneyWorldandespeciallysincetheywouldhavetobreak
the news to their daughter, whom they had taken the trip for to
celebrateherbirthday.
1173. After their March visit, C.R.J. contacted Guest Relations before
planningasecondtriptoWaltDisneyWorld, this time, tocelebrate
C.J.J.’sbirthday.ShespokewithaDisneyemployeenamedAndrea,to
whom she communicated her disastrous experiences during their
March trip. Andrea assured C.R.J. that if they returned to Walt
Disney World, the family would be able to receive additional
accommodations,includingextraFastPasses.
1174. C.R.J.andC.J.J.returnedtoWaltDisneyWorldinaboutMayof2014,
hopingafewextraFastPasseswouldatleastallowthemtomakethe
most of a bad situation. Instead, they would encounter frustration
after frustration at the Disney Parks. As a result of Disney’s new
DAS,C.R.J. andC.J.J.were inherently limited to the rides they could
rideandtheactivitiestheycouldenjoy.
1175. C.R.J.andC.J.J.begantheirsecondpost‐DASDisneyvisitbygoingon
the Peter Pan ride, where they used a FastPass to gain quicker
access. Next, C.J.J. wanted to meet Peter Pan. However, Peter Pan
was out to lunch. Upon returning later, the line was around the
corner and the Disney employee expressly refused to accept
FastPassesortheDAS.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 118 of 334 Page ID #:737
Page119
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1176. They re‐routed themselves to Pirates of the Caribbean, only to be
instructed that theywould need to come back at a DAS‐prescribed
time. Uponreturning to the rideat thedesignated time, theywere
still required to idly endure a wait before riding the ride. They
encountered similar experiences at subsequent rides, with C.J.J.’s
fathereachtimetryingtore‐routeordistractC.J.J.tokeephimfrom
experiencingameltdown.
1177. On several occasions, C.J.J. wished to repeat a ride. Upon being
denied this accommodation, C.R.J. had to physically remove C.J.J.
fromtheride,beforehewoulddroptothefloorintotalmeltdown.
1178. Ultimately,C.R.J.andC.J.J. lefttheDisneyParksafterthefirstdayof
theirMayvisit,disappointedbuthopefultheirseconddaywouldbe
better.
1179. TheseconddaystartedattheFrozenDisneyExperience,arrivingat
9:30a.m.,onlytoreceiveareturntimeof2:20p.m.UsingFastPasses,
therodethreeridespriortoreturningtoFrozen. Whilethesecond
dayoftheMaytripwasbetterthanthefirst,C.R.J.andC.J.J.still left
feelingdisappointedandunfulfilled,havingobtainedaccess toonly
fourridesinthesixhoursspentwithintheDisneyParks.
1180. Since thatvisit,C.R.J.hasreasonablyvowed tonotreturnwithC.J.J.
andherfamilytotheDisneyParkssolongastheDASisstillinforce.
1181. Disney personnel have repeatedly shown no openness, willingness
ordesiretoimprovetheexperienceforguestslikeC.J.J.
1182. C.R.J.incurredexpensesassociatedwithwastedtripstotheParks.
1183. After October 9, 2013, C.J.J. no longer received the level of
accommodation C.J.J. and C.R.J. had receivedwhen they visited the
Parksinthepast.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 119 of 334 Page ID #:738
Page120
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1184. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate C.J.J.’s needs, C.J.J. and C.R.J. have been discouraged
anddeterredfromthefulluseandenjoymentoftheParks'ridesand
attractions.C.R.J.wouldvisittheParkswithC.J.J.againifDisneyhad
notabandoneditspastpolicyofaccommodatingthespecialneedsof
persons with cognitive impairments. Disney’s discrimination
against C.J.J. has substantially reduced their interest in visiting the
Parks. They will not attend the Parks in the future due to their
expectation that the DAS experience will again be supremely un‐
accommodating.
1185. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’shistoricabilitytoaccommodateC.J.J.’sspecialneeds,Disney
personnel have refused to conduct an individualized assessmentof
C.J.J.'s capacity to utilize the DAS, and have refused to modify the
DAStoallowC.J.J. toenjoythesamebenefitsandprivilegesasnon‐
disabledpatrons.
1186. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeC.J.J.
1187. C.R.J. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffC.J.J.,byandthroughC.R.J.ashisnextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiffonaccountofC.J.J.’sdisability;and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 120 of 334 Page ID #:739
Page121
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT112
BreachofContract
C.R.J.v.Disney
1188. Plaintiff C.R.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1159through1187
above.
1189. C.R.J. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1190. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 121 of 334 Page ID #:740
Page122
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1191. C.R.J. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffC.R.J.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithC.R.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.R.J. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT113
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.R.J.v.Disney
1192. Plaintiff C.R.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1159through1187
above.
1193. During one or more visits to the Parks, C.R.J.’s beloved son C.J.J.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinC.R.J.’spresence.
1194. The symptoms and conditions associated with C.J.J.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoC.J.J.underFloridalaw.
1195. C.J.J.’s meltdown in the Parks was proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful, recklessandarbitrary treatmentofC.J.J.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewC.J.J. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1196. C.R.J. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
C.J.J.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown.Particularlyinlightof
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 122 of 334 Page ID #:741
Page123
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardher son, C.R.J.
coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1197. C.R.J.’s observation of C.J.J.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conductandtreatmentwhichproximatelycausedC.J.J.toexperience
themeltdown caused C.R.J. grave and extrememental anguish and
emotionaltrauma,forwhichDisneyshouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.R.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
C.R.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.R.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.R.J. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT114
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.R.J.v.Disney
1198. Plaintiff C.R.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1159through1187
above.
1199. During one or more visits to the Parks, C.R.J.’s beloved son C.J.J.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
1200. The symptoms and conditions associated with C.J.J.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 123 of 334 Page ID #:742
Page124
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1201. C.J.J.’s meltdown in the Parks was proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of C.J.J. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
C.J.J.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
1202. C.R.J. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
C.J.J.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown.Particularlyinlightof
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardher son, C.R.J.
coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1203. C.R.J.’s observation of C.J.J.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conductandtreatmentwhichproximatelycausedC.J.J.toexperience
themeltdown caused C.R.J. grave and extrememental anguish and
emotionaltrauma,forwhichDisneyshouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.R.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponC.R.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.R.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.R.J. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 124 of 334 Page ID #:743
Page125
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT115
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
L.D.J.v.Disney
1204. PlaintiffL.D.J. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1205. L.D.J. has autism. Her cognitive level is that of a third grader,
approximately nine years below her equivalent grade level. L.D.J.’s
verbalskillsareextremelylimited.
1206. L.D.J. becomes particularly agitated when forced to idly wait for
extendedperiodsoftime,orwhenthereisanytypeofmodification
toherusualroutines.
1207. L.D.J. expresses her frustrations through behavioral meltdowns
which generally consist of intense, extremely loud, dramatic crying
episodesthatadverselyaffectherbreathing.
1208. L.D.J.isapersonwithadisability,pursuanttothatterm’sdefinition
in42U.S.C.§12102(1).
1209. L.D.J.is17yearsoldandinthecareofhermother,T.M.J.,whobrings
this action as L.D.J.'s next friend, parent, andnatural guardian, and
herfather,D.A.J.
1210. L.D.J.andT.M.J.areresidentsofLosAngelesCounty,California.
1211. L.D.J. firstattendedDisneylandwithherparentswhenshewas two
or three years of age. BecauseDisneylandwas close to their home,
L.D.J., T.M.J., andD.A.J visited frequently. During these visits, L.D.J.
exhibited a level of excitement and joy she rarely exhibited
elsewhere. For L.D.J and her family, trips to Disneyland before the
DASweremagicalexperiences.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 125 of 334 Page ID #:744
Page126
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1212. For most of her childhood and throughout her teens, L.D.J. visited
DisneylandwithT.M.J.andD.A.J.,wasissuedaGuestAssistanceCard,
andwaswonderfullyaccommodated.T.M.J.lovedtheexperienceso
much she became a “Disney kid”. Her bedroom is decorated in a
Disney theme, and going to Disneyland was the one thing in the
worldT.M.J. feltwas special for her daughter. Itwas the one place
where L.D.J. actually enjoyed herself, and the only place where
people really seemed to care for her. T.M.J. delighted in the
opportunity to bring to her beloved daughter a level of happiness
whichshesimplyisunabletoexpressanywherebutDisneyland.
1213. For the past fourteen years, T.M.J., D.A.J., and L.D.J. have been
premium pass holders for Disneyland; visiting whenever they
wished. L.D.J. rarely experienced behavioral meltdowns because
with theGuestAssistanceCard, theywereprovidedefficientaccess
withfewrestrictions.
1214. Since L.D.J. was a small child, her cognitive impairments have
manifestedthemselvesinaspecificwayduringthefamily’svisitsto
theParks: L.D.J.mustexperienceher favoriteDisneylandrides ina
precise, exact order. For example, L.D.J. must start any Disneyland
visit at the Teacups ride, and must then proceed to It’s a Small
World.Thefamilyhappilyfollowedthesameschedule,duringevery
single visit. Any changes or disruptions in that routinewould have
resultedinameltdown.
1215. WheneverL.D.J.suffersthroughameltdown,herparentsmakeevery
attempt to calm her down. However, nothing they try will soothe
her. These experiences are heart wrenching for T.M.J.’s parents
becausetheywantnothingmorethantohelptheirdaughter,butall
theycandoiswaitforthemeltdowntosubside.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 126 of 334 Page ID #:745
Page127
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1216. Similarly, if L.D.J. is required to idly wait for entry into a ride or
attraction for more than a few minutes, she will experience a
meltdown.
1217. BecauseL.D.J.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitinga
rideorattractionforthepurposeofmakinganappointmenttocome
back later. Traveling toanattractiveonly tobe refusedadmission,
asrequiredbytheDAS,createsavoidablestressors forL.D.J.,which
significantly increases the probability of experiencing a meltdown.
In fact, since the implementation of the DAS, L.D.J. has actually
experiencedseveralmeltdownsatDisneyland.
1218. T.M.J. andD.A.Jwere first toldaboutDisney’snewDASatCityHall.
They attempted to explain to Disney employees theways inwhich
thesystemwouldnotaccommodateL.D.J.’sspecialneeds.However,
the Disney employees refused to discuss any individualized
assessment of whether the DAS would accommodate L.D.J.’s
disability. They refused to discuss additional accommodations,
instead repeating the newDisney employee refrain that theDAS is
thenewDisneypolicyandnothingelsecanorwillbedone.
1219. After implementationof theDAS,Disneylandceasedbeingthemost
wonderful place in the world for T.M.J. Instead, it was horrible.
When confronted with the DAS’s inability to provide fair
accommodations for L.D.J., Disney employees uniformly responded:
“Thisiswhatthepolicyis;thisishowweweretrained.”
1220. This new policy and training requires L.D.J.’s family to spend
additional time walking around the park, getting L.D.J.’s DAS
passport stamped, andmaking appointments for future rides. The
DAS compounds this frustration prohibiting the family from
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 127 of 334 Page ID #:746
Page128
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
obtaining simultaneouswait times; i.e., they cannot go on one ride
whilewaitingfortheirturntogoonanotherride.
1221. DuetoDisney’sarbitraryanddiscriminatoryaccessibilitypolicy,and
due to Disney’s refusal to conduct individualized assessments, and
due to its refusal toaccommodateguestswithcognitivedisabilities
such as L.D.J., L.D.J. has been prevented from experiencing the full
enjoyment of the Parks, to the same extent afforded to persons
withoutadisability.
1222. After DAS went into effect, L.D.J. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionL.D.J.,T.M.J, andD.A.J. receivedwhen
they visited the Parks in the past. L.D.J and her family have not
returnedtoDisneylandsincetheirlastvisitduringlate2013.
1223. Due to Disney’s refusal to modify its procedures to reasonably
accommodate L.D.J.’s needs, L.D.J. has been deterred from the full
use and enjoyment of the park’s rides and attractions. As a
consequence,thefamily’sinterestinattendingDisneylandwhilethe
DAS remains in place has been considerably reduced, if not
completelyextinguished.
1224. T.M.J. and D.A.J. would continue to visit the Parks with L.D.J.
frequently,astheydidforfourteenyears,hadDisneynotabandoned
its past practices of accommodating the special needs of persons
with cognitive impairments. The family’s decision to not return to
Disneyland since their late 2013 visit is directly attributable to the
dreadfulexperiencestheyhavebeensubjectedtoundertheDAS.
1225. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge and
awarenessof theneedsofpersonswithcognitive impairments,and
notwithstanding Disney’s historic eagerness and ability to
accommodate L.D.J.’s special needs, Disney personnel have refused
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 128 of 334 Page ID #:747
Page129
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
to conduct an individualized assessmentof L.D.J.'s capacity to avail
herself to theDASpolicies;and tomodify theDAS toallowL.D.J. to
enjoythesamebenefitsandprivilegesasnon‐disabledguests.
1226. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeL.D.J.
1227. T.M.J. incurred monetary costs associated with the family’s
lamentableandwastedpost‐DAStriptoDisneyland.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.D.J., by and through T.M.J., as L.D.J.'s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of L.D.J.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
andproceduresinordertoaffordPlaintiffwithanopportunityto
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhenshevisitstheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination regarding Disney’s remedial measures and
modified policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring
Plaintiff from visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated
discrimination;and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 129 of 334 Page ID #:748
Page130
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT116
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
L.D.J.v.Disney
1228. L.D.J. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1205through1227above.
1229. L.D.J.is,andatallmaterialtimeshasbeen,adisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1230. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1231. Section 52 of the California Civil Code provides that whomever
denies, aids, or incites a denial, or makes any discrimination or
distinction contrary to Section 51, is liable for each and every
offense.
1232. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1233. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1234. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 130 of 334 Page ID #:749
Page131
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
L.D.J.’s access toDisney’s programs, services and activities. Disney
hasinstitutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdeny,orwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the aforementioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation, and anxiety, due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonable accommodations and access, as are necessitated by
Plaintiff’scognitiveimpairments.
1235. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct,declaratoryandinjunctivereliefisappropriate. Moreover,
as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering irreparable
harm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisadequate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.D.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of L.D.J.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 131 of 334 Page ID #:750
Page132
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.D.J. in the amount of her non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT117
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.D.J.v.Disney
1236. Plaintiff L.D.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1205through1227
above.
1237. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.D.J. suffered actual
meltdowns.
1238. The symptoms and conditions associated with L.D.J.’s meltdowns
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1239. L.D.J.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,reckless,andarbitrarytreatmentofL.D.J.during
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 132 of 334 Page ID #:751
Page133
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
her patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewL.D.J. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated insucha
manner.
1240. L.D.J.’s meltdowns and the treatment which proximately caused
L.D.J. to experience them caused her grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.D.J., by and through T.M.J. as L.D.J.’s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
L.D.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.D.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.D.J. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT118
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.D.J.v.Disney
1241. Plaintiff L.D.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1205through1227
above.
1242. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.D.J. suffered actual
meltdowns.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 133 of 334 Page ID #:752
Page134
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1243. The symptoms and conditions associated with L.D.J.’s meltdowns
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1244. L.D.J.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of L.D.J. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
L.D.J. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
manner.
1245. L.D.J.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedL.D.J.
to experience them caused her grave and extreme mental anguish
andemotionaltrauma,forwhichDisneyshouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.D.J., by and through T.M.J., as L.D.J.’s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponL.D.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.D.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.D.J. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 134 of 334 Page ID #:753
Page135
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT119
BreachofContract
T.M.J.v.Disney
1246. Plaintiff T.M.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1205through1227
above.
1247. T.M.J. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1248. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1249. T.M.J. incurred monetary costs associated with the family’s ruined
and wasted trips to the Parks. Plaintiff is damaged by Disney’s
breachofcontract.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.M.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithT.M.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.M.J. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 135 of 334 Page ID #:754
Page136
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT120
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.M.J.v.Disney
1250. Plaintiff T.M.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1205through1227
above.
1251. During one or more visits to the Parks, T.M.J.’s beloved daughter,
L.D.J.,sufferedactualmeltdownswhileinT.M.J.’spresence.
1252. The symptoms and conditions associated with L.D.J.’s meltdowns
constitutedaphysicalinjurytoT.M.J.underCalifornialaw.
1253. L.D.J.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofL.D.J.during
her patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewL.D.J. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated insucha
mannerbyanyone.
1254. T.M.J. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
L.D.J.’s escalating frustration, and her resulting meltdowns.
Particularly in light of her trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
towardherdaughter,T.M.J. coulddonothingreasonable toprevent
themeltdowns.
1255. T.M.J.’s observation of L.D.J.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused L.D.J. to
experience themeltdowns, causedT.M.J. grave andextrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.M.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 136 of 334 Page ID #:755
Page137
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
T.M.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.M.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.M.J. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT121
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.A.Jv.Disney
1256. Plaintiff D.A.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1205through1227
above.
1257. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.A.J.’s beloved daughter,
L.D.J.,sufferedactualmeltdownswhileinD.A.J.’spresence.
1258. The symptoms and conditions associated with L.D.J.’s meltdowns
constituteaphysicalinjurytoL.D.J.underCalifornialaw.
1259. L.D.J.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,reckless,andarbitrarytreatmentofL.D.J.during
her patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewL.D.J. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated insucha
mannerbyanyone.
1260. D.A.J. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
L.D.J.’sescalatingdistress,andherresultingmeltdowns.Particularly
in light of his trust and confidence that Disneywould complywith
applicable law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardhis
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 137 of 334 Page ID #:756
Page138
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
daughter, D.A.J. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
1261. D.A.J.’s witnessing of L.D.J.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused L.D.J. to
experience themeltdowns, causedD.A.J. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.A.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
D.A.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.A.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.A.J. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT122
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.M.J.v.Disney
1262. Plaintiff T.M.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1205through1227
above.
1263. During one or more visits to the Parks, T.M.J.’s beloved daughter,
L.D.J.,sufferedactualmeltdowns.
1264. The symptoms and conditions associated with L.D.J.’s meltdowns
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 138 of 334 Page ID #:757
Page139
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1265. L.D.J.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful, and reckless treatment of L.D.J. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
L.D.J.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
1266. T.M.J. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
L.D.J.’sescalatingdistress,andherresultingmeltdowns.Particularly
in light of her trust and confidence thatDisneywould complywith
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
daughter, T.M.J. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
1267. T.M.J.’s witnessing of L.D.J.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused L.D.J. to
experience themeltdowns, causedT.M.J. grave andextrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.M.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponT.M.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.M.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.M.J. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 139 of 334 Page ID #:758
Page140
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT123
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.A.J.v.Disney
1268. Plaintiff D.A.J. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1205through1227
above.
1269. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.A.J.’s beloved daughter,
L.D.J.,sufferedactualmeltdowns.
1270. The symptoms and conditions associated with L.D.J.’s meltdowns
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1271. L.D.J.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of L.D.J. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
L.D.J.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
1272. D.A.J. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
L.D.J.’sescalatingdistress,andherresultingmeltdowns.Particularly
in light of his trust and confidence that Disneywould complywith
applicable law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardhis
daughter, D.A.J. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdown.
1273. D.A.J.’s witnessing of L.D.J.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused L.D.J. to
experience themeltdowns, causedD.A.J. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 140 of 334 Page ID #:759
Page141
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.A.J. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponD.A.J.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.A.J.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.A.J. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT124
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
C.J.K.v.Disney
1274. PlaintiffC.J.K. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1275. C.J.K. has autism, Hirschsprung’s disease, anal atresia and
megacephaly.
1276. C.J.K.’sspeechisdelayedaswellashiscognitivedevelopment.
1277. C.J.K. is six years of age and is generally in the care of hismother,
P.A.K., who brings this action as C.J.K.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1278. C.J.K.andP.A.K.areresidentsofPolkCounty,Florida.
1279. PriortoOctober9,2013,C.J.K.andP.A.K.visitedWaltDisneyWorld
atleastonepermonthsinceC.J.K.wasthreeyearsold.Duringthose
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 141 of 334 Page ID #:760
Page142
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
visits, C.J.K. exhibited a nature and extent of joy that C.J.K. rarely
showed inanyothersetting. P.A.K.wasalwaysproudand joyfulof
the opportunity to bring to her beloved child a level of happiness
whichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
1280. Becauseofthesefondmemories,C.J.K.andP.A.K.visitedWaltDisney
WorldonoraboutNovember2013.
1281. C.J.K. is incapable of idly standing in extended lines without his
cognitive impairmentscausinghim toexperienceanxiety, stimming
and meltdowns. Triggers will cause C.J.K. to jump, flap his arms,
rock,andwhine. WhenC.J.K. isheadedtowardameltdown,hewill
scream,cry,andthrowhimself totheground. C.J.K. isnotawareof
his surroundings when he has a meltdown. He has limited verbal
skills.
1282. C.J.K. is unable to wait in line not only because he doesn’t
understandtheconceptofdoingso,butbecauseoftheconstantneed
to takehim to thebaby care center to changehis diaper (he is too
big for the changing tables in the regular bathrooms). P.A.K. can’t
takeC.J.K.intoalonglinebecauseshemighthavetogetoutquickly
andgettothebabycarecenterfromwherevertheymightbeinthe
Parks.
1283. In order to experience the facilities and services of Disney Parks
sincetheimplementationoftheDAS,C.J.K.isnowforcedtoidlywait
anextendedduration,enduringallpotential triggers,atCityHall to
have his photograph taken and a Disability Access Card made for
him.
1284. Similarly,eachtimeC.J.K.wantstoexperienceWaltDisneyWorldhe
is forced to idlywait amongst trigger after trigger for return times
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 142 of 334 Page ID #:761
Page143
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
on each ridewhich limit the order inwhich he can experience the
rides.
1285. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
factthatC.J.K.’sdiagnosiswillnotchange.TheexpirationoftheDAS
card after approximately two weeks assures that each visit to the
Parkswillbeginwithstressors,notpleasures.
1286. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant has
preventedC.J.K.fromexperiencingthefullenjoyment,equaltothose
withoutadisability,oftheDisneyParks.
1287. SinceDefendant’s implementationof theDAS,C.J.K. andP.A.K.have
visitedmultipleDisneysitesbetweenNovember2013andthefiling
of this action, including Walt Disney World and complained to
variousmanagers.
1288. The new procedure triggers C.J.K. more frequently at Walt Disney
World.
1289. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate C.J.K.’s special needs,
Disney personnel now offered ineffective, apathetic, obtuse
responses to P.A.K.’s recitations regarding C.J.K.’s needs. Their
actions were so contrary to Disney’s body of knowledge and to
Disney’s historic performance thatDisney cannot have accidentally
proposedsuchabsurdities.
1290. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeC.J.K.
1291. P.A.K.incurredexpensesduringthewastedtripstotheParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 143 of 334 Page ID #:762
Page144
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffC.J.K.,byandthroughP.A.K.ashisparentand
natural guardian, prays that this Court adjudicate this dispute and enter
anOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of C.J.K.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 144 of 334 Page ID #:763
Page145
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT125
BreachofContract
P.A.K.v.Disney
1292. Plaintiff P.A.K. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1275through1291
above.
1293. P.A.K. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1294. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1295. P.A.K. incurred expenses during the wasted trips to the Parks.
PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffP.A.K.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithP.A.K.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff P.A.K. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT126
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.J.K.v.Disney
1296. Plaintiff C.J.K. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1275through1291
above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 145 of 334 Page ID #:764
Page146
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1297. During one or more visits to the Parks, C.J.K. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1298. The symptoms and conditions associated with C.J.K.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1299. C.J.K.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofC.J.K.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewC.J.K. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated insucha
mannerbyanyone.
1300. C.J.K.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedC.J.K.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.J.K., by and through P.A.K. as C.J.K.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
C.J.K.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.J.K.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.J.K. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 146 of 334 Page ID #:765
Page147
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT127
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.J.K.v.Disney
1301. Plaintiff C.J.K. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1275through1291
above.
1302. During one or more visits to the Parks, C.J.K. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1303. The symptoms and conditions associated with C.J.K.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1304. C.J.K.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of C.J.K. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
C.J.K.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
1305. C.J.K.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedC.J.K.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.J.K., by and through P.A.K. as C.J.K.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponC.J.K.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.J.K.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.J.K. in the amount of such
damages;
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 147 of 334 Page ID #:766
Page148
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT128
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
A.J.M.v.Disney
1306. PlaintiffA.J.M.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1307. A.J.M. has autism. A.J.M. also suffers from severe speech delay and
has been enrolled in an individualized education plan through the
school system. A.J.M.’s symptoms and stimming patterns include
jumpinginplaceandverbalnoisesincludinglowgroaning.Behavior
meltdowns for A.J.M. include loud verbal noises and screaming,
jumpingupanddown,andgroaningloudly.
1308. A.J.M.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
1309. A.J.M. is six years of age and is generally in the care of hismother,
L.M.M., who brings this action as A.J.M.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian,andhisfather,M.M.
1310. L.M.M.andA.J.M.areresidentsofPrincessAnneCounty,Virginia.
1311. Prior toOctober of 2013, A.J.M. and L.M.M. visited theWaltDisney
WorldParkstwiceperyear.A.J.M.carriedtheGuestAssistanceCard
(GAC) andwas admirably accommodated. A.J.M. exhibited a nature
andextentofjoythatherarelyshowedinanyothersetting. L.M.M.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 148 of 334 Page ID #:767
Page149
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
wasproudandjoyfuloftheopportunitytobringtoherbelovedson
a levelofhappinesswhichhe rarely showedelsewhere.Their trips
to the Disney Parks during this time were so grand, L.M.M.
purchased annual passes in 2009 and purchased an interest in
Disney’s Vacation Club at Saratoga Springs in 2010, incurring an
$11,000.00 mortgage to do so. For A.J.M. and L.M.M., trips to the
DisneyParkshada special,meaningfulplace in theirhearts. Itwas
the only place in the world that A.J.M. responded, allowing L.M.M.
andher family to bond and enjoy their time togetherunlike at any
otherplacetheyvisitedasafamily.
1312. A.J.M. is incapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitingarideor
attraction only to be prohibited from riding it until a future time.
Thus, thenewDAScreatesavoidable stressors forA.J.M., escalating
hisstimmingpatternstowardmeltdowns.
1313. IfA.J.M.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideorattraction
formorethanafewminuteshewouldlikelymeltdown.
1314. Under the GAC, A.J.M. and L.M.M. almost always had a pleasurable,
meltdown‐freeexperienceattheDisneyParks.
1315. A.J.M.andL.M.M.plannedatriptotheDisneyParksfromOctober27,
2013 to November 6, 2013 – a packaged vacation. Upon learning
about the DAS, A.J.M. and L.M.M. subsequently cancelled their trip
andoptedforaDisneyCruiseinstead.Inordertoavoidlosingtheir
$200.00 deposit, and upon Disney Guest Relations’ insistence that
the familycomeand tryoutDisney’snewsystem, the familykepta
one‐day park hopper ticket. It was during this one day that they
experiencedthehorrorsoftheDAS.
1316. On November 5, 2013, A.J.M. and L.M.M. arrived at Epcot early to
obtain their DAS because they were told the wait times at Magic
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 149 of 334 Page ID #:768
Page150
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
KingdomGuestRelationsexceedonehour.Atitsbestpointsduring
theday, theexperienceand theaccessibilityprovided toA.J.M.was
arbitrary. They rode Soarin’ after a Disney ride operator waved
A.J.M. and L.M.M. into the FastPass line. But after taking a boat to
HollywoodStudios,theyencountereda90‐minutewaitatToyStory
MidwayMania. At thispoint,A.J.M. experiencedhis firstmeltdown
asaresultoftheDAS.
1317. A.J.M.andL.M.M.wereforcedtoleavetheToyStoryattraction.They
visited another attraction prior to returning to Toy Story to keep
their appointment. They were not able to ride another ride until
4:16p.m.thatafternoon–JungleCruise®.
1318. A.J.M. and L.M.M. also experienced difficulty with discrimination
during the Disney Parade. It all started at Guest Relations earlier
that day, when the Disney employee, in the process of issuing the
DAS,toldL.M.M.ifA.J.M.wereinawheelchair,hewouldnothaveto
be issued a return time.Disney later admitted that this instruction
regardingDisney’sownDASwasincorrect.
1319. During the Disney Parade, A.J.M. and L.M.M. were required to
producetheirDAScardbeforegainingaccesstothedisabledseating
section. Theywere then askedmultiple times during theParade to
showtheirDAScardinordertoprovetheycouldsitinthatsection.
All thewhile, guests inwheelchairswere not asked to provide any
proof;beinginawheelchairapparentlywasenough.Theconsistency
of inconsistency was too much for A.J.M. and L.M.M. They left the
park shortly thereafter, unhappy anddissatisfiedwith theirDisney
experience.
1320. L.M.M. incurredexpensesassociatedwithwastedtripstotheParks,
andpurchasedaDisneyVacationClubMembershipwhichisuseless
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 150 of 334 Page ID #:769
Page151
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
forsolongasDisneyrefusestoaccommodatepersonswithcognitive
impairments.
1321. After October 9, 2013, A.J.M. no longer received the type of
accommodation and attentionA.J.M. and L.M.M. had receivedwhen
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
1322. As a result of Disney’s failure to engage in an individualized
assessmentofA.J.M.’s special needs, andDisney’s refusal tomodify
its procedures to reasonably accommodate them, are discouraged
anddeterredfromthefulluseandenjoymentofthePark'sridesand
attractions. L.M.M. would visit the Parks with A.J.M. again had
Disneynot abandoned itspastpolicyof accommodating the special
needsofpersonswithcognitiveimpairments.
1323. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate A.J.M.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessment ofA.J.M.'s capacity to utilize theDAS, andhave refused
to modify the DAS to allow A.J.M. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1324. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeA.J.M.
1325. A.J.M. and L.M.M. have already visited the Parks considerably less
frequently than theydid in thepast, a situationwhich continues to
this day. Their interest in attending Disney Parks is substantially
reduced. Theywill not attend the Parks in the future due to their
expectation that the experience will again be a supremely un‐
accommodatingone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 151 of 334 Page ID #:770
Page152
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffA.J.M.,byandthroughL.M.M.ashisnext
friend,parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of A.J.M.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 152 of 334 Page ID #:771
Page153
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT129
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
O.M.M.v.Disney
1326. Plaintiff O.M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through
66,68,and651through654above.
1327. O.M.M. has been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD). O.M.M. also suffers from severe developmental
delay and has impulse control, sensory and anxiety issues, all of
which require medication to control. As a result, O.M.M. is in an
individualizededucationprogram.
1328. Behavior meltdowns for O.M.M. include climbing, yelling, and
screamingwildly.
1329. O.M.M. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
1330. O.M.M. issixyearsofageandisgenerally inthecareofhismother,
L.M.M., who brings this action as O.M.M.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian,andhisfather,M.M.
1331. L.M.M.andO.M.M.areresidentsofPrincessAnneCounty,Virginia.
1332. PriortoOctoberof2013,O.M.M.andL.M.M.visitedtheWaltDisney
World Parks twice per year. O.M.M. carried the Guest Assistance
Card (GAC) and was admirably accommodated. O.M.M. exhibited a
natureandextentof joythatherarelyshowedinanyothersetting.
L.M.M. was proud and joyful of the opportunity to bring to her
belovedsonalevelofhappinesswhichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
TheretripstoDisneyduringthistimeweresogrand,theypurchased
intoDisney’sVacationClubatSaratogaSpringsin2010,incurringan
$11,000.00mortgage todoso.ForO.M.M.andL.M.M., their trips to
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 153 of 334 Page ID #:772
Page154
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
theDisney Parks had a special,meaningful place in their hearts. It
was the only place in theworld that O.M.M.was not a slave to his
ADHD and anxiety issues, allowing L.M.M. and her family to bond
andenjoy their time togetherunlikeatanyotherplace theyvisited
asafamily.
1333. O.M.M.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitingarideor
attraction only to be prohibited from riding it until a future time.
Thus,thenewDAScreatesavoidablestressorsforO.M.M.,escalating
hisbehaviorpatternsandanxietylevelstowardameltdown.
1334. Similarly,ifO.M.M.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideor
attractionformorethanafewminuteshewouldlikelymeltdown.
1335. UndertheGAC,O.M.M.andL.M.M.almostalwayshadapleasurable,
meltdown‐freeexperienceattheDisneyParks. O.M.M.didnoteven
havetotakehismedication.
1336. O.M.M.andL.M.M.planneda trip to theDisneyParks fromOctober
27,2013toNovember6,2013–apackagedvacation.Uponlearning
about theDAS,O.M.M. andL.M.M. subsequently cancelled their trip
andoptedforaDisneyCruiseinstead.Inordertoavoidlosingtheir
$200.00 deposit, they kept a one‐day park hopper ticket. It was
duringthisonedaythattheyexperiencedthehorrorsoftheDAS.
1337. On November 5, 2013, A.J.M. and L.M.M. arrived at Epcot early to
obtain their DAS because they were told the wait times at Magic
KingdomGuestRelationsexceedonehour.Atitsbestpointsduring
theday, theexperienceand theaccessibilityprovided toA.J.M.was
arbitrary. They rode Soarin’ after a Disney ride operator waved
A.J.M. and L.M.M. into the FastPass line. But after taking a boat to
HollywoodStudios,theyencountereda90‐minutewaitatToyStory
MidwayMania. AtthispointO.M.M.experiencedhisfirstmeltdown
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 154 of 334 Page ID #:773
Page155
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
as a result of theDAS.Hebegan crying, jumpingupanddown, and
slamminghimselfintotheground.
1338. O.M.M. and L.M.M. were forced to leave the Toy Story attraction.
They visited another attraction prior to returning to Toy Story to
keep their appointment. They were not able to ride another ride
until4:16p.m.thatafternoon–JungleCruise®.
1339. O.M.M. and L.M.M. also experienced difficulty with discrimination
during the Disney Parade. It all started at Guest Relations earlier
that day, when the Disney employee, in the process of issuing the
DAS,toldL.M.M.ifA.J.M.wereinawheelchair,hewouldnothaveto
be issued a return time.Disney later admitted that this instruction
regardingDisney’sownDASwasincorrect.
1340. During the Disney Parade, O.M.M. and L.M.M. were required to
producetheirDAScardbeforegainingaccesstothedisabledseating
section. Theywere then askedmultiple times during theParade to
showtheirDAScardinordertoprovetheycouldsitinthatsection.
All thewhile, guests inwheelchairswere not asked to provide any
proof;beinginawheelchairapparentlywasenough.Theconsistency
of inconsistencywas toomuch for O.M.M. and L.M.M. They left the
park shortly thereafter, unhappy anddissatisfiedwith theirDisney
experience. L.M.M. incurred expenses associated with wasted trips
to the Parks, and purchased a Disney Vacation Club Membership
which is useless for so long as Disney refuses to accommodate
personswithcognitiveimpairments.
1341. After October 9, 2013, O.M.M. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionO.M.M.andL.M.M.hadreceivedwhen
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 155 of 334 Page ID #:774
Page156
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1342. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate O.M.M.’s needs, O.M.M. and L.M.M. have been
discouraged and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
Park's rides and attractions. L.M.M. would visit the Parks with
O.M.M. again if Disney had not abandoned its past policy of
accommodating the special needs of persons with cognitive
impairments.
1343. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate O.M.M.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessmentofO.M.M.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefused
tomodify the DAS to allow O.M.M. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1344. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeO.M.M.
1345. O.M.M. and L.M.M. have not returned to Walt Disney World since
theirdisastrousvisitunderDAS.Anyinteresttheyhadofvisitingin
thefuturehasbeensubstantiallyreduced,duetotheirbeliefthatthe
experiencewillagainbeadevastatinglyunaccommodatingone.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffO.M.M.,byandthroughL.M.M.ashisnext
friend,parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account ofO.M.M.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 156 of 334 Page ID #:775
Page157
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT130
BreachofContract
L.M.M.v.Disney
1346. Plaintiff L.M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1307through1325,and
1327through1345above.
1347. L.M.M. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1348. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 157 of 334 Page ID #:776
Page158
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1349. L.M.M. incurredexpensesassociatedwithwastedtripstotheParks,
andenteredintoan$11,000.00mortgagetofundaDisney’sVacation
Club membership purchase which is useless for so long as Disney
refuses to accommodate the accessibility needs of persons with
cognitiveimpairments.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffL.M.M.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithL.M.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.M.M. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT131
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.M.M.v.Disney
1350. Plaintiff L.M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1307through1325,and
1327through1345above.
1351. DuringoneormorevisitstotheParks,L.M.M.’sbelovedsonsO.M.M.
andA.J.M.sufferedactualmeltdownswhileinL.M.M.’spresence.
1352. The symptoms and conditions associated with O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s
meltdowns constitute a physical injury to O.M.M. and A.J.M. under
Floridalaw.
1353. O.M.M.andA.J.M.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycaused
byDisney’snegligent,unlawful, recklessandarbitrary treatmentof
O.M.M.andA.J.M.duringtheirpatronageofDisney’sfacilities.Atall
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 158 of 334 Page ID #:777
Page159
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
material times, Disney knew O.M.M. and A.J.M. to be vulnerable to
emotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamannerbyanyone.
1354. L.M.M.directlyobservedthestressorsleadinguptothemeltdowns,
O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s resulting escalation and their meltdowns.
Particularly in light of her trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
towardhersons,L.M.M.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthe
meltdowns.
1355. L.M.M.’s observation of O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s meltdowns and of the
outrageousconductandtreatmentwhichproximatelycausedO.M.M.
and A.J.M. to experience the meltdowns caused L.M.M. grave and
extreme mental anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney
shouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.M.M. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
L.M.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.M.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.M.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 159 of 334 Page ID #:778
Page160
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT132
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.M.M.v.Disney
1356. Plaintiff L.M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1307through1325,and
1327through1345above.
1357. DuringoneormorevisitstotheParks,L.M.M.’sbelovedsonsO.M.M.
andA.J.M.sufferedactualmeltdowns.
1358. The symptoms and conditions associated with O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s
meltdownsconstituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1359. O.M.M.andA.J.M.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycaused
by Disney’s outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of O.M.M.
and A.J.M. during their patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all
material times, Disney knew O.M.M. and A.J.M. to be vulnerable to
emotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamannerbyanyone.
1360. L.M.M.directlyobservedthestressorsleadinguptothemeltdowns,
O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s resulting escalation and their meltdowns.
Particularly in light of her trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
towardhersons,L.M.M.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthe
meltdown.
1361. L.M.M.’s observation of O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s meltdowns and of the
outrageousconductandtreatmentwhichproximatelycausedO.M.M.
and A.J.M. to experience the meltdown caused L.M.M. grave and
extreme mental anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney
shouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.M.M. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 160 of 334 Page ID #:779
Page161
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponL.M.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.M.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.M.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT133
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
M.M.v.Disney
1362. Plaintiff M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1307through1325,and
1327through1345above.
1363. Duringoneormorevisits to theParks,M.M.’s beloved sonsO.M.M.
andA.J.M.sufferedactualmeltdownswhileinM.M.’spresence.
1364. The symptoms and conditions associated with O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s
meltdowns constitute a physical injury to O.M.M. and A.J.M. under
Floridalaw.
1365. O.M.M.andA.J.M.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycaused
byDisney’snegligent,unlawful, recklessandarbitrary treatmentof
O.M.M.andA.J.M.duringtheirpatronageofDisney’sfacilities.Atall
material times, Disney knew O.M.M. and A.J.M. to be vulnerable to
emotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamannerbyanyone.
1366. M.M. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdowns,
O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s resulting escalation and their meltdowns.
Particularly in light of his trust and confidence that Disney would
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 161 of 334 Page ID #:780
Page162
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
toward his sons, M.M. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
1367. M.M.’s observation of O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s meltdowns and of the
outrageousconductandtreatmentwhichproximatelycausedO.M.M.
and A.J.M. to experience the meltdowns caused M.M. grave and
extreme mental anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney
shouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.M. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
M.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoM.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT134
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
M.M.v.Disney
1368. Plaintiff M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1307through1325,and
1327through1345above.
1369. Duringoneormorevisits to theParks,M.M.’s beloved sonsO.M.M.
andA.J.M.sufferedactualmeltdowns.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 162 of 334 Page ID #:781
Page163
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1370. The symptoms and conditions associated with O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s
meltdownsconstituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1371. O.M.M.andA.J.M.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycaused
by Disney’s outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of O.M.M.
and A.J.M. during their patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all
material times, Disney knew O.M.M. and A.J.M. to be vulnerable to
emotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamannerbyanyone.
1372. M.M. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdowns,
O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s resulting escalation and their meltdowns.
Particularly in light of his trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
toward his sons, M.M. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdown.
1373. M.M.’s observation of O.M.M. and A.J.M.’s meltdowns and of the
outrageousconductandtreatmentwhichproximatelycausedO.M.M.
and A.J.M. to experience the meltdown caused M.M. grave and
extreme mental anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney
shouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.M. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponM.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoM.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 163 of 334 Page ID #:782
Page164
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT135
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
S.E.M.v.Disney
1374. PlaintiffS.E.M.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1375. S.E.M. isgenerally inthecareofhismother,T.D.M.,whobringsthis
actionasS.E.M.’snextfriend,parentandnaturalguardian.
1376. S.E.M.andT.D.M.areresidentsofCamdenCounty,NewJersey.
1377. S.E.M.isdiagnosedwithsevereautism.Heisnonverbalandwhenhe
experiencesanxietyhewillstimbytapping,hittinghimself,banging
hisheadandrunningawayfromhisparty.
1378. S.E.M.issevenyearsold.
1379. For many years leading up to October of 2013, T.D.M. and S.E.M.
visited the Disney Parks several times a year and were admirably
accommodated. During those visits, S.E.M thoroughly enjoyed the
DisneyParks.
1380. ThisdrasticallychangedinOctoberof2013whenDisneyrolledout
theDisabilityAccessService.SincetheDASwasreleased,T.D.M.has
reasonablybecometerrifiedoftakingS.E.M.totheDisneyParks.
1381. S.E.M.’scognitiveimpairmentsmanifestthemselvesinacertainway
duringhisvisitstothemeparks;S.E.M.mustexperiencethemeparks
inaspecificorder,travelingtotheleftaroundthepark.
1382. S.E.M.cannottoleratearrivingatanattractionashehasplannedor
anticipatedonlytobetoldtocomebacklater.S.E.M.cannotmakeor
keep appointments. A stressor of this nature will cause S.E.M. to
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 164 of 334 Page ID #:783
Page165
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
begin to stim. S.E.M.’s stimming patterns include tapping, hitting
himself,banginghisheadandrunningawayfromhisparty.
1383. Over time, as is the casewith anymother of a cognitively disabled
child,T.D.M.hasbecomemuchmorefamiliarwithS.E.M.’sstressors.
SheknowsshemustdoallshecantoprotectS.E.M.fromexactlythe
experience Disney would subject him to – idle wait times, and
chaotic rideorder and travelpatterns. The familyhasoccasionally
testedS.E.M.’sabilitytoidlywaitinaqueueorrideridesindiffering
orders at other theme parks. The inability to maintain S.E.M.’s
plannedpatternwillcausehimtomeltdown.
1384. AfterOctober9,2013,T.D.M.learnedthatchildrensuchasherswere
nolongerreceivingthetypeofaccommodationandattentionT.D.M.
received at Disney Parks prior to October 9, 2013. Based on her
knowledge of S.E.M. and his tendencies and special needs, would
Disney’sDAS could not possibly accommodate, T.D.M. canceled her
April2014triptoWaltDisneyWorld.
1385. T.D.M. had been planning a trip to Walt DisneyWorld for months
beforeshelearnedofDisney’sDAScard.Sincecancelingherfamily’s
April2014 trip shehas learned from the reportsofothers thather
fears of the Disney experience and her expectation that the DAS
would have created a horribly unaccommodating experience were
accurate. T.D.M. would be more inclined to visit Disneyland and
Walt DisneyWorld Parkswith S.E.M., if Disney had not abandoned
itspastpolicyof accommodating the special needsofpersonswith
cognitive impairments. The family’s interest in attending
Disneyland andWalt DisneyWorld Parks is substantially reduced.
T.D.M.knowstheymustavoidvisitingtheParksinthefuturedueto
the expectation that the S.E.M. will be subjected to unlawful
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 165 of 334 Page ID #:784
Page166
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
discrimination, and that the experience will be an un‐magical, un‐
fulfillingone,andespeciallyduetotheriskthat theexperiencewill
bedestructiveforS.E.M.
1386. T.D.M.remainsreasonablyconcernedthatvisitingDisneyParkswith
S.E.M. will be a waste of her monetary resources, and an overall
destructiveexperienceforS.E.M.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff S.E.M., through T.D.M. as his Next Friend,
ParentandNaturalGuardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of S.E.M.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 166 of 334 Page ID #:785
Page167
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT136
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
M.A.C.v.Disney
1387. PlaintiffM.A.C.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1388. M.A.C.hasautism.M.A.C.’ssymptomsandstimmingpatternsinclude
echolalia: the repetition of words and phrases. For M.A.C., these
phrases, and sometimes songs, are usually from Disney videos.
Behavior meltdowns for M.A.C. are physical, and he will scream,
beginhittinghimself,andeventuallyelope.At5’10”and250pounds,
M.A.C. can become difficult to control during meltdown as he will
physicallyreachouttoandgrabfamilymembers.
1389. M.A.C. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
1390. M.A.C. is 20yearsof ageand is generally in the careofhismother,
R.M., who brings this action as M.A.C.’s next friend, parent and
plenaryguardian.
1391. R.M.andM.A.C.areresidentsofBrowardCounty,Florida.
1392. R.M.grewupaDisney lover, firstattendingduringherHighSchool
GraduationNight in 1980. R.M. tookM.A.C. to theDisney Parks for
thefirsttimewhenhewas18monthsold.PriortoOctoberof2013,
M.A.C. carried the Guest Assistance Card (GAC) andwas admirably
accommodated.M.A.C. exhibited a nature and extent of joy that he
rarelyshowedinanyothersetting.R.M.wasproudandjoyfulofthe
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 167 of 334 Page ID #:786
Page168
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
opportunity tobring toherbeloved sona level of happinesswhich
he rarely showed elsewhere. R.M. and M.A.C. visited the Disney
Parks multiple times a year during which time M.A.C. rarely
experiencedameltdown.DuringtheirtripstotheDisneyParks,R.M.
noticed M.A.C. was calmer, and the Disney Parks were the only
placesR.M.andM.A.C.couldvisitandexperiencethatcalmness.
1393. In2003,duetothepleasurableexperiencesattheDisneyParks,R.M.
purchasedannualpassesforM.A.C.andherfamily,afterwhichthey
attendedtheDisneyParksatleastonceamonth.InOctoberof2013,
thischangeddrasticallyasR.M.hesitatedtorenewherpassesgiven
Disney’s capricious treatment of persons with cognitive
impairments,particularlyregardingtheapplicationoftheDAStoher
andM.A.C.
1394. M.A.C.’scognitiveimpairmentsmanifestthemselvesinacertainway
during his visits to the Parks;M.A.C. is incapable of understanding
theconceptofvisitingarideorattractiononlytobeprohibitedfrom
ridingituntilafuturetime.M.A.C.doesnotunderstandtheconcept
ofwaitingorhavingtoreturntoaridetorideitlater.M.A.C.cannot
make or keep appointments. For M.A.C. to arrive at an attraction
andberefusedentrywill createdebilitatingmeltdown.M.A.C.must
finishwhatisstarted,orfaceameltdown.
1395. M.A.C. also possesses favoritism toward certain Disney rides, most
notablyBuzzLightyear’sSpaceRangerSpin.WereM.A.C.toarriveat
Buzz Lightyear, only to be told to return at a later time, hewould
beginrepeating,“Wait!Wait!Wait!”andhisstimmingpatterswould
escalate to full‐fledged meltdown. This exact situation occurred
during a recent visit to the Disney Parks during the Christmas
Holidays.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 168 of 334 Page ID #:787
Page169
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1396. Disney’s refusal to provide reasonable accessibility to attractions
such as Buzz Lightyear’s Space Ranger Spin, Test Track, and Peter
Pan, creates avoidable stressors forM.A.C., escalating his stimming
patternstowardmeltdown.
1397. Similarly,ifM.A.C.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideor
attraction for more than a few minutes he also would likely melt
down.
1398. Under the GAC, M.A.C. and R.M. almost always had a pleasurable,
experience at the Disney Parks, facing few meltdowns; R.M. and
M.A.C. would arrive to the Disney Parks early in the day, ride as
manyridesas theycouldatonePark,beforemovingonto thenext
Parktodoitagain.ThischangeddrasticallyoncetheDAScameinto
effect.
1399. M.A.C. andR.M. first experienced the complicationsassociatedwith
theDASinNovemberof2013whilevisitingtheDisneyParksduring
theThanksgivingHoliday.
1400. Theirdaystartedwitha30‐minutewaitatGuestRelationsatEpcot.
Duringthewait,M.A.C.’sfatherhadtostandwithhimoutsideofthe
linetodistracthimwhileR.M.waitedtospeakwithanemployee.
1401. Uponarrivingtothefrontofthelineandspeakingwithanemployee,
R.M. immediately noticed a change in attitude; Disney’s approach
had changed from accommodating to discriminating, from
sympathetic to apathetic. The Disney employee robotically
explained the GAC had been replaced by the DAS and gave details
abouthowtheDASinflexibilityworks,includingreturntimes.
1402. Thefamily’sdayatMagicKingdomduringtheNovember2013visit
was simply awful. It started with a 50‐minute wait at Buzz
Lightyear, during which M.A.C.’s parents were able to suspend
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 169 of 334 Page ID #:788
Page170
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
escalationofM.A.C.’s stimmingpatters towardmeltdown. But they
could do so only once. At their next attempted ride, one forwhich
M.A.C. had grown accustomedwith his GAC to entering through an
alternateentrance.Thisdayhewasconfusinglyinstructedtowaitin
thestandbylinewiththenon‐disabledguests.M.A.C.becamefidgety
and antsy, but luckily, did not suffer the dreaded meltdown R.M.
fearedhewould.
1403. AsthedayprogressedandM.A.C.encounteredstressorafterstressor
due to theDASand its inaccessible return times and standby lines,
M.A.C. grew increasingly agitated. By the time M.A.C. and R.M.
reachedFantasyland,M.A.C.hadreachedhisbreakingpoint.Unable
to find any ride with a wait time less than 45 minutes, R.M.
attemptedto takeM.A.C. for icecream. Thisdetour,beingcontrary
toM.A.C.’sintendedpurpose,inducedameltdown.Ironically,thisis
anactionwhichDisneyrecommends for families inwhichsomeone
is autistic: ifwaiting is difficult, “go get some ice cream!” M.A.C. is
proofthatsuchadviceisnonsense.
1404. M.A.C. experienced another meltdown at Pirates of the Caribbean.
After years of entering through an alternate entrance, the forced
detourintothestandbylinewasanintolerabledisruption.
1405. M.A.C. does not require or request front‐of‐the‐line instant access.
Rather, he requests reasonable access, and avoidance of stressors
likeextended‐durationstandbylinesandcrowdedentrances,which
theDASnowrequiresandtheGACdidnot.Thiscontributesthemost
towardM.A.C.experiencingameltdown.
1406. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improve the experience for guests like M.A.C., and generally
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 170 of 334 Page ID #:789
Page171
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
displayedanoverallattitudelackinginsympathyoraccommodation.
TheemployeesareconditionednottodealwithM.A.C.’sdisability.
1407. R.M.incurredexpensesassociatedwithwastedtripstotheParks.
1408. After October 9, 2013, M.A.C. no longer received the type of
accommodation and attention M.A.C. and R.M. had received when
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
1409. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodateM.A.C.’sneeds,M.A.C.andR.M.havebeendiscouraged
anddeterredfromthefulluseandenjoymentofthePark'sridesand
attractions.R.M.wouldvisittheParkswithM.A.C.againhadDisney
notabandoneditspastpolicyofaccommodatingthespecialneedsof
personswithcognitiveimpairments.
1410. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate M.A.C.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessmentofM.A.C.'scapacity toutilize theDAS,andhaverefused
to modify the DAS to allow M.A.C. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1411. M.A.C. and R.M. have already visited the Parks considerably less
frequently than intended to when they purchased their annual
passes, a situation which continues to this day. Their interest in
attendingDisneyParksissubstantiallyreduced.Theylikelywillnot
attend the Parks in the future due to R.M.’s reasoned expectation
thatM.A.C.willbe subjected to furtherdiscrimination, and that the
Disneyexperiencewillagainbeasupremelyun‐accommodatingone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 171 of 334 Page ID #:790
Page172
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffM.A.C.,byandthroughR.M.ashisnextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of M.A.C.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 172 of 334 Page ID #:791
Page173
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT137
BreachofContract
R.M.v.Disney
1412. Plaintiff R.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1388through1411
above.
1413. R.M. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1414. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1415. R.M. incurred expenses associated with wasted trips to the Parks.
PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffR.M.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithR.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.M. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT138
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.M.v.Disney
1416. Plaintiff R.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1388through1411
above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 173 of 334 Page ID #:792
Page174
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1417. During one or more visits to the Parks, R.M.’s beloved son M.A.C.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinR.M.’spresence.
1418. The symptoms and conditions associated with M.A.C.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoM.A.C.underFloridalaw.
1419. M.A.C.’smeltdownin theParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of M.A.C.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewM.A.C.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
1420. R.M. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
M.A.C.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,R.M.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1421. R.M.’s observation of M.A.C.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused M.A.C. to
experience the meltdown caused R.M. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.M. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
R.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 174 of 334 Page ID #:793
Page175
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT139
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.M.v.Disney
1422. Plaintiff R.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1388through1411
above.
1423. During one or more visits to the Parks, R.M.’s beloved son M.A.C.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
1424. The symptoms and conditions associated with M.A.C.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1425. M.A.C.’smeltdownin theParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of M.A.C. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
M.A.C. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1426. R.M. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
M.A.C.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,R.M.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1427. R.M.’s observation of M.A.C.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused M.A.C. to
experience the meltdown caused R.M. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 175 of 334 Page ID #:794
Page176
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.M. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponR.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT140
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
A.M.N.v.Disney
1428. PlaintiffA.M.N.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1429. A.M.N. has autism. She also suffers from extreme sensory issues, a
behavioralfeedingdisorder,andlowmusculartone.A.M.N.becomes
overtly anxious when forced to idly wait for more than a few
minutes. A.M.N. wears headphones to avoid over‐stimulation and
requirestheuseofamobilitystrollerandaserviceanimal,Ziva.Ziva
istrainedtoleadA.M.N.throughcrowds,trackherwhensheelopes,
interrupt repetitive behaviors, and to alleviate her meltdowns by
lyingontopofher.BehaviormeltdownsforA.M.N.consistgenerally
ofaggressivebehaviordirectedtowardherself,hermother,andher
father,S.R.N.,aswellasincreasingA.M.N.’spropensitytoelope.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 176 of 334 Page ID #:795
Page177
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1430. A.M.N. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
1431. A.M.N. is eightyearsoldand isgenerally in thecareofhermother,
V.M.N. who brings this action as A.M.N.'s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1432. A.M.N.andV.M.N.areresidentsofMaricopaCounty,Arizona.
1433. V.M.N.grewupaDisneyloverandinstilledthatsameloveofDisney
inherdaughter.Infact,V.M.N.visitedDisneyseveraltimeswhileshe
wasgrowingup;alongwithhersister,whohasbeendiagnosedwith
cerebral palsy; yetwas able to enjoyher trips toDisneyland in the
1980s, a time when Disneyland accommodated V.M.N.’s sister
wonderfully.
1434. V.M.N.firsttookA.M.N.toDisneylandin2009whenA.M.N.wasthree
yearsold.ItwastheonlyplaceintheworldwhereV.M.N.,A.M.N.and
S.R.N.werethinkingaboutthesamethingatthesametime,enjoying
thesameexperience,asafamily.Afterthefirstvisit,V.M.N.tookher
child to theDisney Parks at least twice a year. During those visits,
A.M.N.exhibitedanatureandextentofjoythatsherarelyshowedin
any other setting, even greeting strangers and interactingwith the
Disneycharacters,Tinkerbellbeingherfavorite. V.M.N.wasalways
proudand joyful of theopportunity tobring toherbeloved child a
levelofhappinesswhichsherarelyshowedelsewhere.
1435. ForV.M.N.andA.M.N.,a typicalvisit toDisneylandduringtheprior
GACwas an accommodating experience.Uponarrival at theDisney
Parks, V.M.N.would obtain a GAC fromGuest Relationswithin five
minutes. During this interaction, Disney employees courteously
greeted V.M.N. and A.M.N. with a smile before examining their old
GACcardandthenstampinganewGACcard.V.M.N.spenttherestof
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 177 of 334 Page ID #:796
Page178
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
the day riding the rides A.M.N. wished to ride in the order she
neededtoridetheminonthatparticularday.
1436. Since A.M.N. was a toddler, her cognitive impairments have
manifestedthemselves inacertainwayduringthe family’svisits to
theParks. A.M.N.mustexperience thepark inaspecificorder,and
disruptions in her necessary routine will tend to escalate her
stimmingbehaviorstowardmeltdowns.
1437. IfA.M.N.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideorattraction
formore than about tenminutes, she alsowould likelymelt down.
Duringthewait,herbehaviors–pacingbackandforth,tighteningof
hermuscles,anxiety,aggressiontowardhermother,herfather,and
herself, echolalia (the repetition of certain phrases over and over
again, such as the name of the ride, “I want to go now!” and “too
manypeople!”)wouldescalateinfrequencyorseverity.Ifsheisnot
removedfromthecondition,ameltdownwilloccur.
1438. WhenA.M.N.reachesthepeakofhermeltdown,shewilldroptothe
ground. It is at this point Ziva will lay on top of her to help ease
A.M.N.duringhermeltdown.
1439. BecauseA.M.N.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisiting
arideorattractiononlytobeprohibitedfromridingituntilafuture
time,thenewDAScreatesavoidablestressors forA.M.N.,escalating
her stimming patterns towardmeltdowns, especially in high traffic
areas of the park. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS,
A.M.N.hasexperiencedseveralmeltdownsatDisneylandduetothe
varied stressors which are imposed upon A.M.N. by the DAS:
extendedwait times; thedirective to enter the rides fromdifferent
locations,disruptionofpatterns/routinesA.M.N.hadgrownusedto.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 178 of 334 Page ID #:797
Page179
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1440. Due to its failure to accommodate, which leads to an increased
propensity for A.M.N. experiencing a meltdown, Defendant has
preventedA.M.N. fromexperiencing the full enjoymentof itsParks,
equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
1441. Unlikemostindividualsdiagnosedwithautism,A.M.N.possessesthe
ability to understand she has autism. She has experienced
embarrassment at the hands of Disney and their inability to
accommodateherundertheDASregime,oftenaskingV.M.N.,“Don’t
theyknowIhaveautism?”
1442. V.M.N. and A.M.N.’s last visit to Disneyland before the DAS was
implemented was on October 4, 2013. During this visit, a Disney
employeetoldV.M.N.DisneywasdoingawaywiththeGAC.Shocked,
V.M.N. asked how Disney expected to accommodate A.M.N. during
theirnextvisit.TheDisneyemployeesimplyreplied,“Youwillhave
towaitandsee,”andrefusedtoelaboratefurther.
1443. V.M.N.andA.M.N.’s firstandonlyvisit toDisneylandundertheDAS
wasonFebruary28,2014.Aftera30‐minutewaitatGuestRelations,
V.M.N.andA.M.N.’ssupremelyunaccommodatingdaybeganatPeter
Pan, where they were asked to wait in a “wheelchair line.” While
they waited in line, a family of six non‐DAS customers walked up
withFastPasses inhandandweregranted immediate access to the
ride, while V.M.N., S.R.N., and A.M.N. watched and waited, aghast.
Unfortunately, this would not be the only time V.M.N. and A.M.N.
would experience this exact set of circumstances; being asked to
waitinlineandwatchasotherfamiliesweregivenpromptaccessto
Disney’s attractions and rides. Guests with tour guides were also
allowed fast access to the ride, while A.M.N. was required to wait
extendedperiodsoftime.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 179 of 334 Page ID #:798
Page180
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1444. Next,V.M.N.andA.M.N.visitedtheFrozenMeetandGreetAttraction
wheretheywereconfrontedwitha120‐minutewait.V.M.N.showed
the employeeA.M.N.’sDAS card towhich she responded “Wedon’t
doDASorFastPassesforcharactermeetandgreets,”beforerefusing
to write down a return time on A.M.N.’s DAS card, contrary to
explicit instructions given to V.M.N. at Guest Relations when they
firstenteredtheDisneyParks.V.M.N.andA.M.N.facednochoicebut
towalkawayafterwhichA.M.N.experiencedherfirstmeltdown. If
Disney is using the DAS to feign a genuine desire to accommodate
rather than exclude guests with cognitive impairments, it has not
even gone to the trouble of erecting a such a false construct for
character meet and greets. Those events are simply inaccessible,
period.
1445. V.M.N. and A.M.N. were able to recover from her first meltdown,
afterwhichtheysuccessfullyvisitedafewDisneyattractions. Then
they reached Star Tours,whichA.M.N. had always entered through
analternateentrance.TherideoperatortoldV.M.N.andA.M.N.they
could no longer enter that way and must ride an elevator. V.M.N.
experienced another dreadedmeltdown, not entirely as a result of
the arbitrary disruption. An additional contributor is the
requirement of elevator usage. Elevators are highly stimulating to
autisticpersons,positivelyornegatively.
1446. A.M.N. suffered anothermeltdown at Autopia,where the employee
directed A.M.N. and her parents to wait at a queue located in a
tunnel,insteadofallowingthemtoentertheridethroughtheexit,as
hadalwaysbeenpermittedinthepast.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 180 of 334 Page ID #:799
Page181
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1447. V.M.N.andA.M.N. left theParksby5:00p.m.,disappointedby their
unfulfillingDisneyexperience;whichlackedtheaccommodationand
magicV.M.N.andA.M.N.hadalwaysexperiencedbeforetheDAS.
1448. Before they left thepark,V.M.N.went toGuestRelations todiscuss
all of the unfavorable issues they were confronted with at
Disneyland.The employee toldV.M.N. that shewould communicate
withmanagement,andaskedV.M.N.toreturninthemorning.V.M.N.
did as requested, but the employee offered no answers. V.M.N.
visitedGuestRelationsonfiveseparateoccasions,eachtimehoping
for answers about what more could be done other than rigidly
followingtheletteroftheDAS.Oneachoccasion,Disneyrefusedto
provideanyinformation. Disneyrefusedtoconsiderordiscussany
individualassessmentofA.M.N.’sneeds.
1449. V.M.N.andA.M.N.returnedtotheDisneyParksthenextday,hoping
for a better Disney experience. After a 25‐minute wait at Mickey’s
Fun Wheel, which did not accept the DAS or return times, A.M.N.
experiencedyetanothermeltdown.
1450. After October 9, 2013, A.M.N. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionA.M.N.andV.M.N.hadreceivedwhen
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
1451. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate A.M.N.’s needs, A.M.N. and V.M.N. have been
discouraged and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
park's rides and attractions. V.M.N. would visit the Parks with
A.M.N. more often if Disney had not abandoned its past policy of
accommodating the special needs of persons with cognitive
impairments. Their interest in attending the Parks is substantially
reduced.V.M.N.knowstheyshouldavoidattendingtheparksinthe
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 181 of 334 Page ID #:800
Page182
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
future due to the reasonable expectation that A.M.N. will be
subjectedtodiscrimination,andthattheexperiencewillagainbean
un‐magicalandun‐accommodatingone.
1452. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate A.M.N.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessmentofA.M.N.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefused
to modify the DAS to allow A.M.N. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1453. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeA.M.N.
1454. V.M.N.incurredexpensesassociatedwithwastedtripstotheParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffA.M.N.byandthroughV.M.N.,asA.M.N.'snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of A.M.N.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 182 of 334 Page ID #:801
Page183
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT141
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
A.M.N.v.Disney
1455. A.M.N. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1429through1454above.
1456. A.M.N.isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1457. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1458. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1459. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 183 of 334 Page ID #:802
Page184
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1460. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1461. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
A.M.N.’saccesstoDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities.Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
1462. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs A.M.N. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiffsonaccountofA.M.N.’sdisability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 184 of 334 Page ID #:803
Page185
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.M.N. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT142
BreachofContract
V.M.N.v.Disney
1463. Plaintiff V.M.N. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1429through1454
above.
1464. V.M.N. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 185 of 334 Page ID #:804
Page186
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1465. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1466. V.M.N. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’s wasted trips
totheParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff V.M.N. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithV.M.N..;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff V.M.N.in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT143
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
A.M.N.v.Disney
1467. Plaintiff A.M.N. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1429through1454
above.
1468. During one or more visits to the Parks, A.M.N. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1469. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.N.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1470. A.M.N.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.M.N.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.M.N.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 186 of 334 Page ID #:805
Page187
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1471. A.M.N.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
A.M.N. to experience the meltdown caused her grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffA.M.N.,byandthroughV.M.N.asA.M.N.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
A.M.N.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoA.M.N.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.M.N. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT144
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
A.M.N.v.Disney
1472. Plaintiff A.M.N. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1429through1454
above.
1473. During one or more visits to the Parks, A.M.N. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1474. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.N.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1475. A.M.N.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.M.N. during her
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 187 of 334 Page ID #:806
Page188
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.M.N. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1476. A.M.N.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
A.M.N. to experience the meltdown caused her grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffA.M.N.,byandthroughV.M.N.asA.M.N.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponA.M.N.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoA.M.N.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.M.N. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT145
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
V.M.N.v.Disney
1477. Plaintiff V.M.N. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1429through1454
above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 188 of 334 Page ID #:807
Page189
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1478. During one or more visits to the Parks, V.M.N.’s beloved daughter
A.M.N.sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinV.M.N.’spresence.
1479. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.N.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoA.M.N.underCalifornialaw.
1480. A.M.N.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.M.N.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.M.N.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
1481. V.M.N. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
A.M.N.’sresultingescalationandhermeltdown.Particularlyinlight
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
daughter, V.M.N. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdown.
1482. V.M.N.’s observation of A.M.N.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.M.N. to
experience themeltdown caused V.M.N. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff V.M.N. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
V.M.N.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoV.M.N.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff V.M.N. in the amount of such
damages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 189 of 334 Page ID #:808
Page190
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT146
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
V.M.N.v.Disney
1483. Plaintiff V.M.N. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1429through1454
above.
1484. Duringoneormorevisits to theParks,V.M.N.’sbelovedsonA.M.N.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
1485. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.N.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1486. A.M.N.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.M.N. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.M.N. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1487. V.M.N. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
A.M.N.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularlyin light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
daughter, V.M.N. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdown.
1488. V.M.N.’s observation of A.M.N.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.M.N. to
experience themeltdown caused V.M.N. grave and extrememental
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 190 of 334 Page ID #:809
Page191
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff V.M.N. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponV.M.N.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoV.M.N.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff V.M.N. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT147
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
L.J.P.v.Disney
1489. PlaintiffL.J.P. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1490. L.J.P. has autism. L.J.P.’s symptoms and stimming patterns include
theinabilitytositstill,constantfidgeting,andseekingpressure;for
example, pressing his shoulders against the back of a chair or his
headagainstatable.L.J.P.hasverylimitedsocialskillsanddifficulty
making choices. Behavior meltdowns for L.J.P. consist generally of
tantrum‐likebehavior,includingloudverbalscreamingandremarks
such as “I am not listening!” physical violence toward his brother,
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 191 of 334 Page ID #:810
Page192
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
and either falling to the ground and failing wildly about or
elopement. Oftentimes, before experiencing a meltdown, L.J.P. will
tellhismotherorfatherhe“needstosqueeze.”
1491. L.J.P.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
1492. L.J.P.issevenyearsofageandisgenerallyinthecareofhismother,
J.R.P., who brings this action as L.J.P.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1493. J.R.P.andL.J.P.areresidentsofSt.JohnsCounty,Florida.
1494. Formany years leading up toOctober of 2013, from the timeL.J.P.
was three years old, L.J.P. and J.R.P. visited theWalt DisneyWorld
Parksdozensoftimes.L.J.P.carriedtheGuestAssistanceCard(GAC)
andwasadmirablyaccommodated;undertheGAC,J.R.Pwasalways
impressed at how Disney took into account the needs and
disabilitiesofL.J.P.During thosevisits,L.J.P.exhibitedanatureand
extentof joy thathe rarely showed in anyother setting. J.R.P.was
alwaysproudand joyfulof theopportunity tobring toherbeloved
sonalevelofhappinesswhichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
1495. In July of 2013, L.J.P. relocated from New York to St. Augustine,
Florida.A large influence for this relocationwas the ability to visit
the Disney Parks more often. As such, L.J.P. and J.R.P. purchased
annualpasses inAugustof2013withtheintentionofattendingthe
DisneyParksseveraltimesmoreperyear.
1496. L.J.P.’s cognitive impairmentsmanifest themselves in a certainway
duringhisvisitstotheparks;L.J.P.isincapableofunderstandingthe
conceptofvisitingarideorattractiononlytobeprohibitedtorideit
until a future time. L.J.P. does not understand the concept of
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 192 of 334 Page ID #:811
Page193
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
extensivelywaitingorhavingtoreturntoarideatalatertime.L.J.P.
isveryliteralinhisunderstanding.
1497. While L.J.P. does not require a particular order of rides, he does
prefer to ride roller coasters and rides at the Disney Parks which
travel in a circular motion because this alleviates his need for
sensory pressure. For example, no trip to the Disney Parks is
completewithoutridingDumbotheFlyingElephant.
1498. The inability to ride these rides during a visit to the Disney Parks
because of theDAS creates avoidable stressors for L.J.P., escalating
hisstimmingpatternstowardmeltdowns.Asaresult,J.R.P.doesall
that she can do to strategically avoid rides L.J.P. might otherwise
love to ride, for fear that theywill receive a return time far in the
future,which likely lead to ameltdownupon tellingL.J.P., “Wewill
havetocomeback.”
1499. Similarly, ifL.J.P.wererequired to idlywait forentry intoarideor
attraction for more than a few minutes, he also would likely melt
down.
1500. Like most parents of autistic children, J.R.P. knows her child’s
stimming,tics,andtendencies.Sheknowsthestimulithatarelikely
to overwhelm him. And she does not permit these stimuli to
overwhelmhim;noparentwillpermitanautisticchildtoexperience
ameltdownifsuchcanbeavoided.
1501. Under the GAC, L.J.P. and J.R.P. had generally pleasant, meltdown‐
free experiences at the Disney Parks. L.J.P. and J.R.P. were able to
leisurely walk through the Disney Parks and ride the rides L.J.P.
wantedtorideashesawthem,withmanageable,non‐stressfulwait
timespriortoadmissionorentry.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 193 of 334 Page ID #:812
Page194
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1502. L.J.P. and J.R.P. first experienced the complications associatedwith
theDASduring their first trip to theDisneyParksafter theDAS, in
November2013.
1503. The day started with a 45‐minute wait at Guest Relations. Upon
arriving to the front of the line, the employee gave J.R.P. so much
resistancebeforegivingheraDAScard,herhusbandhadtostep in
and explain to the employee why L.J.P. needed special assistance.
The Disney employee explained that the GAC was no longer
available,theDASisthenewpolicy,and“thisisourpolicyandthere
isnothingelsewecando”. As theDisneyemployeeexplainedhow
thenewDASwouldwork,J.R.P.andherhusbandknewimmediately
thiswouldnotworkforL.R.P.However,theyagreedtogivetheDAS
atryandhopeforthebest.
1504. UponreceivingtheDAS,L.J.P.andJ.R.P.triedtouseitastheDisney
employeehadexplained.Whattheyencounteredwasacomplicated
day of trying to plan rides in advance, juggle schedules, and avoid
rideswiththelongestridetimestopreventL.J.P.fromexperiencing
ameltdown.UndertheDAS,itwasimpossibletoplantheirdayand
enjoy the Disney Parks as other families of non‐disabled persons
couldbecause theyhadnopracticaloptionexcept toridewhatever
ridetheycouldsignupforatanyparticulartime.
1505. J.R.P.subsequentlyspentthedayredirectingL.J.P.’sattentiontoward
whatever ride they had signed up for on the DAS. Gone was the
leisurelystrollthroughofthepark,theabilitytoridewhicheverride
wouldbringhimthegreatestenjoymentat the time,and the family
experience theDisney Parks had once upon a time given J.R.P. and
L.R.P.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 194 of 334 Page ID #:813
Page195
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1506. L.R.P. and J.R.P. were also forced to stay in the Disney Parks for
longerthantheyhadinthepast;thoughtheywereabletoenjoyonly
half the number of attractions they routinely enjoyed during the
shortertypicaldayundertheGAC.
1507. Some Disney employees were actually courteous and sympathetic.
ThoseemployeesadmittedtoJ.R.P.andherhusbandthattheDASis
inadequate.
1508. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeL.J.P.
1509. J.R.P. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
1510. After October 9, 2013, L.J.P. no longer received the type of
accommodation and attention L.J.P. and J.R.P. had received when
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
1511. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate L.J.P.’s needs, L.J.P. and J.R.P. have been discouraged
anddeterredfromthefulluseandenjoymentofthepark'sridesand
attractions. J.R.P. would visit the Parks with L.J.P. more often if
Disney had not abandoned its past policy of accommodating the
special needs of persons with cognitive impairments. J.R.P. now
feels they should avoid attending the parks asmuch in the future,
especially during peak season, due to the reasonable expectation
that L.J.P. will be subjected to further discrimination and that the
experiencewillagainbeanun‐magicalandun‐accommodatingone.
1512. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate L.J.P.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 195 of 334 Page ID #:814
Page196
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
assessmentofL.J.P.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefusedto
modify the DAS to allow L.J.P. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1513. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeL.J.P.
1514. L.J.P. and J.R.P. have already visited the Parks considerably less
frequently than theydid in thepast, a situationwhich continues to
this day. Their interest in attending Disney Parks is substantially
reduced.
1515. J.R.P. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffL.J.P.,byandthroughJ.R.P.ashisnextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of L.J.P.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 196 of 334 Page ID #:815
Page197
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT148
BreachofContract
J.R.P.v.Disney
1516. Plaintiff J.R.P. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1490through1515
above.
1517. J.R.P. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1518. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1519. J.R.P. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.R.P.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithJ.R.P.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.R.P. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 197 of 334 Page ID #:816
Page198
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT149
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
G.C.P.v.Disney
1520. PlaintiffG.C.P.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1521. G.C.P.hasautism.
1522. G.C.P. is fiveyearsofageand isgenerally in thecareofhismother,
M.I.P., who brings this action as G.C.P.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1523. G.C.P.andM.I.P.areresidentsofOrangeCounty,California.
1524. G.C.P. andM.I.P.were annualpassholderswho,prior toOctober9,
2013, visited Disneyland approximately five times per month.
Duringthosevisits,G.C.P.exhibitedanatureandextentofjoythathe
rarely showed in any other setting. M.I.P. was always proud and
joyful of the opportunity to bring to her beloved child a level of
happinesswhichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
1525. G.C.P. is incapable of standing in lines without his cognitive
impairments causing him to experience stimming and meltdowns
whenrequiredtowaitinalineforasignificantperiod.Triggerswill
causeG.C.P.torunaway,startstimmingwithhigh‐pitchedgroaning,
spin objects, tip‐toe walk, line‐up objects, throw himself to the
ground,andspit.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 198 of 334 Page ID #:817
Page199
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1526. G.C.P.’sdisordernecessitatesthatheexperienceparkattractionsina
certain order, beginning with Star Tours, and riding it twice, then
riding the Rocket Ship, then the Buzz Lightyear ride. Hewill then
repeatthesequence.
1527. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant has
prevented G.C.P. from experiencing the full enjoyment, equal to
thosewithoutadisability,oftheDisneyParks.
1528. In order to experience the facilities and services of Disney Parks
since the implementation of the DAS, G.C.P. is now forced to idly
stand in extended‐duration lines, enduring all stressors and
potentialmeltdowntriggers,startingwithCityHallatthebeginning
oftheday,wherehemustwaitjusttohavehisphotographtakenand
tohavetheDAScardmadeforhim.
1529. Similarly, each time G.C.P. wants to experience Disneyland, he is
forcedto idlywaitamongsttriggeraftertrigger forreturntimeson
eachridewhichaltertheorderinwhichhecanexperiencetherides.
1530. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
fact that G.C.P.’s diagnosis will not change and his annual pass is
good for twelve months. The expiration of the DAS card after
approximately two weeks assures that each visit to the Parks will
beginwithstressors,notpleasures.
1531. SinceDefendant’s implementationof theDAS,G.C.P.andM.I.P.have
visited multiple Disney Parks, including Disneyland and California
Adventure Park on multiple occasions, including at least visits on
November2,2013andFebruary1,2014.
1532. The new procedure triggers G.C.P’s meltdowns more frequently at
theDisneyParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 199 of 334 Page ID #:818
Page200
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1533. TheaccommodationsDisneyclaimstoprovidethroughtheDASwill
not allow G.C.P. to utilize his annual pass in such a way that it
provides theequal enjoymentof theDisneyParks as thatof anon‐
disabledperson.
1534. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate G.C.P.’s special needs,
Disney personnel now offered ineffective, apathetic, obtuse
responses to M.I.P.’s recitations regarding G.C.P.’s needs. Their
actions and statements were so contrary to Disney’s body of
knowledgeandtoDisney’shistoricperformancethatDisneycannot
haveaccidentallyproposedsuchabsurdities.
1535. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeG.C.P.
1536. M.I.P.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theparks.
1537. G.C.P. andM.I.P. reduced the frequency of Disneyland visits to two
timesamonthafterOctober9,2013anddidnotrenewtheirpasses
uponexpiration. Whiletheywouldhavean interest inreturningto
theDisneyParksifDisneyshouldreturntoitspriorcommitmentto
accommodatingdisabledpersons,theircurrentinterestinattending
Disney Parks is substantially reduced. M.I.P. knows that upon
returning to the Parks G.C.P. would experience further unlawful
discrimination,andfurtherhumiliation.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffG.C.P.,byandthroughM.I.P.ashisnext
friend,parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 200 of 334 Page ID #:819
Page201
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of G.C.P.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT150
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
G.C.P.v.Disney
1538. G.C.P. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1521through1537above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 201 of 334 Page ID #:820
Page202
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1539. G.C.P. isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1540. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1541. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1542. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1543. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1544. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
G.C.P.’saccess toDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 202 of 334 Page ID #:821
Page203
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1545. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs G.C.P. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of G.C.P.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff G.C.P. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 203 of 334 Page ID #:822
Page204
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT151
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.C.P.v.Disney
1546. Plaintiff J.C.P. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1547. J.C.P.hasautism.
1548. J.C.P. is twoyearsof ageand is generally in the careofhismother,
M.I.P.,whobringsthisactionasJ.C.P.’sparentandnaturalguardian.
1549. J.C.P.andM.I.P.areresidentsofOrangeCounty,California.
1550. Prior to October 9, 2013, M.I.P. took J.C.P. to the Disney Parks
approximately five times per month. During those visits, J.C.P.
exhibitedanatureandextentof joythat J.C.P.rarelyshowedinany
othersetting.M.I.P.wasalwaysproudandjoyfuloftheopportunity
to bring to her beloved child a level of happiness which he rarely
showedelsewhere.
1551. Because of these fondmemories, J.C.P. andM.I.P. visited California
AdventureParkandDisneylandafterOctober9,2013.
1552. J.C.P. is incapable of standing in lines formore than a fewminutes
withouthiscognitiveimpairmentscausinghimtosuffermeltdowns.
Standing in line for a significant timewill cause J.C.P. to run away,
walkandjumponhistiptoes,yellandcry.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 204 of 334 Page ID #:823
Page205
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1553. Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, Defendant has
preventedJ.C.P.fromexperiencingthefullenjoyment,equaltothose
withoutadisability,oftheDisneyParks.
1554. In order to experience the facilities and services of Disney Parks
since the implementation of the DAS, J.C.P. is now forced to idly
standinanextended‐durationline,enduringallpotentialmeltdown
triggers, including just to start the day at City Hall to have his
photographtakenandaDAScardmadeforhim.
1555. Similarly, each time J.C.P. wants to experience Disneyland he is
forcedto idlywaitamongsttriggeraftertrigger forreturntimeson
eachridewhichlimittheorderinwhichhecanexperiencetherides.
1556. TheDAScardisonlyvalidforapproximatelytwoweeks,despitethe
factthatJ.C.P.’sdiagnosiswillnotchangeandhisannualpassisgood
for twelve months. The expiration of the DAS card after
approximately two weeks assures that each visit to the Parks will
beginwithstressors,notpleasures.
1557. SinceDefendant’s implementationof theDAS,G.C.P.andM.I.P.have
visited multiple Disney Parks, including Disneyland and California
Adventure Park onmultiple occasions, including but not limited to
visitsonNovember2,2013andFebruary1,2014.
1558. The new procedure triggers J.C.P. to experience meltdowns more
frequentlyattheDisneyParks.
1559. The accommodationsDisney claims to provide through theDASdo
notallowJ.C.P.toexperienceequalenjoymentoftheDisneyParksto
thesameextentasthatofanon‐disabledperson.
1560. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate J.C.P.’s special needs,
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 205 of 334 Page ID #:824
Page206
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Disney personnel now offered obtuse and ineffective responses to
M.I.P.’s recitations regarding J.C.P.’s needs. Their actions and
statementswere so contrary toDisney’s bodyof knowledge and to
Disney’s historic performance thatDisney cannot have accidentally
proposedsuchabsurdities.
1561. Disney personnel showed no openness, willingness or desire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeJ.C.P.
1562. M.I.P. expenses associated with the family’s wasted trips to the
Parks.
1563. J.C.P. and M.I.P. have already visited the Parks considerably less
frequently than they intended when they purchased the annual
passes for their family, and did not renew their passes. Their
interest in attending Disney Parks is substantially reduced. While
they would have an interest in returning to the Disney Parks if
Disney should return to its prior commitment to accommodating
disabledpersons,theircurrentinterestinattendingDisneyParksis
substantiallyreduced.M.I.P.knowsthatuponreturningtotheParks
J.C.P.wouldexperiencefurtherunlawfuldiscrimination,andfurther
humiliation.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.C.P.,byandthroughM.I.P.ashisparentand
naturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdisputeandenter
anOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.C.P.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 206 of 334 Page ID #:825
Page207
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT152
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
J.C.P.v.Disney
1564. J.C.P. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1547through1563above.
1565. J.C.P. isandatallmaterial timeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1566. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 207 of 334 Page ID #:826
Page208
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1567. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1568. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1569. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1570. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
J.C.P.’s access toDisney’s programs, services and activities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
1571. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs J.C.P. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 208 of 334 Page ID #:827
Page209
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of J.C.P.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.C.P. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 209 of 334 Page ID #:828
Page210
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT153
BreachofContract
M.I.P.v.Disney
1572. Plaintiff M.I.P. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1521through1537,and
1547through1563above.
1573. M.I.P. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1574. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1575. M.I.P.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffM.I.P.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithM.I.P.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.I.P. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedby
theCourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT154
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
A.T.W.v.Disney
1576. PlaintiffA.T.W.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 210 of 334 Page ID #:829
Page211
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1577. A.T.W. has been diagnosed with severe mental and medical
conditionsthathaveplacedhimonhomehospitalservices,including
autism and is subject to anxiety attacks. He becomes particularly
anxious when forced to idly wait for more than five minutes.
Additionally, A.T.W.’s verbal skills are not well‐developed; he is
uncommunicativeandnon‐verbal.BehavioralmeltdownsforA.T.W.
consist generallyof aggressivebehaviordirected towardhis father,
mother,andsisterwhichmayincludescratchingandbiting.
1578. A.T.W. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
1579. A.T.W. is 16 years old and is generally in the care of his mother,
T.W.R., who brings this action as A.T.W.'s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian,andhisstep‐father,R.C.R.
1580. A.T.W.andT.W.R.areresidentsofLosAngelesCounty,California.
1581. A.T.W. first attendedDisneyland in 2005whenhewas seven years
old. From that time forward, T.W.R., R.C.R., and A.T.W. regularly
attendedtheDisneyParkswithhissister,T.L.R.,going2‐3timesper
week.
1582. Indeed,formuchofhischildhoodA.T.W.hasvisitedDisneylandwith
T.W.R., R.C.R., and his sister, T.L.R. A.T.W. carried the Guest
Assistance Card, and he was admirably accommodated. During
thosevisits,A.T.W.exhibitedanatureandextentofjoythatherarely
showed in any other setting. Disneylandwas a placewhereR.C.R.,
T.W.R., T.L.R., and A.T.W. could unwind after school and bond
together, as a family with two children diagnosed with cognitive
disabilities.T.W.R.wasalwaysproudandjoyfuloftheopportunityto
bring to her beloved child a level of happiness which he rarely
showedelsewhere.A.T.W.couldstayfortheentiredayattheDisney
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 211 of 334 Page ID #:830
Page212
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Parkswithhisfamily,usuallyculminatinginwatchingthefireworks
beforeleavingtheparkfordinneratESPNSportsZoneorPizzaPort.
1583. In2012,A.T.W.was offered and granted a “Green LightPass” from
Disney based on Disney’s reviewing his medical documentation
provided by Home Hospital Services. Disneyland claimed that the
Green Light Pass was only provided to “Make‐A‐Wish Foundation”
children.
1584. On October 9, 2013 when the DAS went into effect, Disney then
revoked A.T.W.’s Green Light Pass, later stating that it had been
replaced by a “Genie Button,” offered through Make‐A‐Wish.
However, Disney advised that his Genie Button is subject to being
revoked, because the DAS would be the only accepted
“accommodation”fordisabledguestssuchasA.T.W.
1585. In 2004 A.T.W. and T.W.R. obtained annual passes for Disneyland.
A.T.W.andT.W.R.visitedDisneyParks2‐3timesperweekbetween
2004 and 2014 and A.T.W. rarely experienced any meltdown
problems. In early 2014 Disney, with no explanation, stopped
acceptingA.T.W.’sGreenLightPass,advisingthattheDASistheonly
acceptableorpermittedpolicy.
1586. Since A.T.W. was a toddler, his cognitive impairments have
manifestedthemselves inacertainwayduringthe family’svisits to
the Parks. A.T.W. and his sister T.L.R. require repeat experience,
which leads them to experience the Parks’ attractions in a specific
order,anddisruptionsintheirplannedroutinewilltendtoescalate
their stimming behaviors toward meltdowns. A.T.W. and T.L.R.
begin their experience with a pre‐programmed strict schedule in
theirheadsoftheDisneylandridestheymustride,andtheorderin
which the rides must be ridden. Deviation from this pre‐defined
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 212 of 334 Page ID #:831
Page213
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
orderwilllikelyleadtoameltdown. Forexample,A.T.W.andT.L.R.
haveexperiencedDisneylandinthefollowingorder:(1)Matterhorn
BobsledsorBigThunderMountainRailroad;(2)SpaceMountain;(3)
FindingNemoSubmarineVoyage (nowclosed)or StarTours –The
Adventure Continues; (4) Autopia; and (5) Alice inWonderland or
Mad Tea Party. If A.T.W. were to visit Disneyland, he would first
travel to Matterhorn Bobsleds or Big Thunder Mountain Railroad,
and,ifhewerenotaffordedtheopportunitytofirstexperiencethat
particular ride before others, he would likely experience a
meltdown.
1587. A.T.W.’s disorders also cause him to have to experience certain
Disneyattractionsrepetitively. A.T.W. isa “repeat rider.” This isa
propensity commonamong autistic persons – a variety of theneed
for consistency, order and routine. A.T.W. will experience a
particularrideorattraction,suchasBigThunderMountainRailroad
or Tower of Terror, over and over, for several hours at a time.
Disney personnel are very familiar with the repeat rider type of
guest.
1588. Similarly,ifA.T.W.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideor
attraction for more than a few minutes he also would likely melt
down.
1589. BecauseA.T.W.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisiting
arideorattractiononlytobeprohibitedfromridingituntilafuture
time,thenewDAScreatesavoidablestressors forA.T.W.,escalating
his stimming patterns toward meltdowns almost instantaneously.
Since Disney’s implementation of the new DAS, A.T.W. has
experiencedseveralmeltdownsatDisneyland.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 213 of 334 Page ID #:832
Page214
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1590. The first day A.T.W. attended the Parks after the DAS came into
effect, he attended with R.C.R., T.W.R., and his sister T.L.R., on
October12,2013.Uponarriving,T.W.R.andR.C.R.waitedtwohours
before speaking to an employee at Guest Relations. During this
ludicrouslylongwait,A.T.W.begantohavehisfirstmeltdown.R.C.R.
and T.W.R explained A.T.W.’s Green Light Pass to the Disney
employee,onlytohavetheemployeerefusetorecognizeitsvalidity.
After waiting an additional 45 minutes in a back office of Guest
RelationsatDisneyland,A.T.W.wasgiventhreeFastPassesexpressly
asacompromisefornolongerrecognizinghisGreenLightPass,but
was told they would still have to wait in lines. In the process of
doing so, the employee also reviewed A.T.W.’s medical
documentation evidencing his cognitive impairments. They also
realizedA.T.W.was in theirsystem forGreenLightaccess,andwas
givenaGenieButton.
1591. For the remainder of A.T.W.’s day at Disneyland, prevailing
conditions were misery and chaos. Disney employees and ride
operators exhibited a lack of training, did not know how to
implement the DAS, appeared consistently perplexed by the DAS
cards as they were presented to them, and generally displayed a
poor attitude toward disabled guests. The uniform response by
Disneyemployeesandrideoperatorsthatdaywas:“thisiswhatthe
policyisandthisishowweweretrained.”
1592. Aftervariouschaoticandstress‐inducingeventsthroughouttheday,
A.T.W.wasforcedtoleavetheparkwithR.C.R.,T.W.R.,andT.L.R.by
mid‐afternoon.Thefrustrationwastoomuchtobear.
1593. During a later visit in March of 2014, A.T.W., who attended
Disneylandwithhis caretaker,wasdenied access to a ridebecause
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 214 of 334 Page ID #:833
Page215
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
theDisneyrideoperatorrefusedtoallowhiscaretakertogoonthe
ride with A.T.W. This incident was reported to Mark Jones
immediatelythereafter;tothisday,Mr.Joneshasnotresponded.
1594. During another subsequent visit, A.T.W. attended Disneyland with
R.C.R., T.W.R., and T.L.R. to see the Aladdin Show. Upon arrival,
R.C.R. and T.W.R. presented A.T.W.’s Genie Button, Make‐A‐Wish
Foundation Lanyard, and his DAS. They requested a “blue card,”
whichinthepast,hadallowedA.T.W.andhispartytositinaspecial
area until the show opened to sit its guests. Initially, the cardwas
granted.However,shortlybeforetheshowstartedandeveryonehad
been seated, a Disney employee went over to A.T.W., removed the
blue card, and gavehima green card instead. Soon thereafter, that
same employee allowed the non‐disabled guests waiting in line to
enterfirstbeforethedisabledguests.BythetimeA.T.W.andtherest
ofthedisabledguestswereallowedtoenterthetheatre,mostofthe
disabilityseatinghadbeentaken.R.C.R.askedanemployeewhythis
had happened. The employee then replied: “You know the rules of
theparkwhenyoucomein.Ifyouhaveacomplaint,takeitupwith
Guest Relations.” The employee then turned his back and walked
away.
1595. Due toDisney’s failure to accommodateA.T.W.’s special needs, and
due to Disney’s arbitrary policies toward disabled guests such as
A.T.W. which leads to an increased propensity for A.T.W.
experiencing a meltdown, Disney has turned its back on disabled
personsandpreventedA.T.W.fromexperiencingthefullenjoyment
ofitsParks,equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 215 of 334 Page ID #:834
Page216
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1596. After October 9, 2013, A.T.W. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionA.T.W.andT.W.R.receivedwhenthey
visitedtheParksinthepast.
1597. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate A.T.W.’s needs, A.T.W. and T.W.R. have been
discouraged and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
park's rides and attractions. T.W.R. would visit the Parks with
A.T.W. more often if Disney had not abandoned its past policy of
accommodating the special needs of persons with cognitive
impairments. Their interest in attending the Parks is substantially
reduced. T.W.R. knows they should avoid attending the parks as
much in the future due to the reasonable expectation that the
experience will include further discrimination against A.T.W., and
willcontinuetobethoroughlyun‐magicalandun‐accommodating.
1598. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate A.T.W.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessmentofA.T.W.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefused
to modify the DAS to allow A.T.W. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1599. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeA.T.W.
1600. T.W.R. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffA.T.W.byandthroughT.W.R.,asA.T.W.'snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 216 of 334 Page ID #:835
Page217
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of A.T.W.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT155
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
A.T.W.v.Disney
1601. A.T.W. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1577through1600above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 217 of 334 Page ID #:836
Page218
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1602. A.T.W.isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1603. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1604. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1605. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1606. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1607. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
A.T.W.’saccesstoDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities.Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 218 of 334 Page ID #:837
Page219
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1608. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs A.T.W. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiffsonaccountofA.T.W.’sdisability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.T.W. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 219 of 334 Page ID #:838
Page220
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT156
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
A.T.W.v.Disney
1609. Plaintiff A.T.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1577through1600
above.
1610. During one or more visits to the Parks, A.T.W. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1611. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.T.W.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1612. A.T.W.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.T.W.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.T.W.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
1613. A.T.W.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
A.T.W. to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffA.T.W.,byandthroughT.W.R.asA.T.W.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 220 of 334 Page ID #:839
Page221
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
A.T.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoA.T.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.T.W. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT157
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
A.T.W.v.Disney
1614. Plaintiff A.T.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1577through1600
above.
1615. During one or more visits to the Parks, A.T.W. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1616. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.T.W.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1617. A.T.W.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.T.W. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.T.W. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1618. A.T.W.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
A.T.W. to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 221 of 334 Page ID #:840
Page222
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffA.T.W.,byandthroughT.W.R.asA.T.W.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponA.T.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoA.T.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.T.W. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT158
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
T.L.R.v.Disney
1619. PlaintiffT.L.R.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1620. T.L.R. has autism, severe separation anxiety, sleepingdisorder, and
isseverelyasthmatic.Shebecomesanxiouswhenforcedtoidlywait
formore thana fewminutes. Additionally,T.L.R.’sverbalskillsare
under‐developed.Behavioralmeltdowns forT.L.R. consistgenerally
of crying, throwing herself on the ground, and possible eloping
withoutwarning.
1621. T.L.R.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 222 of 334 Page ID #:841
Page223
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1622. T.L.R. is eight years old and is generally in the care of hermother,
T.W.R. who brings this action as T.L.R.'s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1623. T.L.R.andT.W.R.areresidentsofLosAngelesCounty,California.
1624. T.L.R. first attendedDisneyland in2006when shewas fivemonths
old. T.L.R. would then regularly attend Disney Parks with R.C.R.,
T.W.R.,andherbrother,A.T.W.,going2‐3timesperweek.
1625. Infact,formuchofherchildhoodT.L.R.hasvisitedDisneylandwith
T.W.R., R.C.R., and her brother, A.T.W. T.L.R. carried the Guest
Assistance Card, and he was admirably accommodated. During
those visits, T.L.R. exhibited a nature and extent of joy that she
rarely showed in any other setting. T.W.R. was always proud and
joyful of the opportunity to bring to her beloved child a level of
happiness which she rarely showed elsewhere. Disneyland was a
place where R.C.R., T.W.R., A.T.W. and T.L.R. could unwind after
school and bond together, as a familywith two children diagnosed
with cognitive impairments. T.L.R. could stay for the entire day at
the Disney Parks with her family, usually culminating in watching
thefireworksbeforeleavingtheparkfordinneratESPNSportsZone
orPizzaPort.
1626. In 2006, T.L.R. and T.W.R. obtained annual passes for Disneyland.
T.L.R. and T.W.R. visited the Disney Parks 2‐3 times per week
between 2006 and 2014. T.L.R. also rarely experienced behavioral
meltdownsduringhervisitstoDisneylandpriortoOctoberof2013
whenDisneybeganenforcingtheDAS.
1627. Since T.L.R. was a toddler, her cognitive impairments have
manifestedthemselves inacertainwayduringthe family’svisits to
the Parks. T.L.R.. and her brother A.T.W. are programmed to and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 223 of 334 Page ID #:842
Page224
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
must experience thepark in a specific order, so thatdisruptions in
theirplannedroutinewilltendtoescalatetheirstimmingbehaviors
towardmeltdowns. A.T.W.andT.L.R.haveastrictscheduleintheir
headoftheDisneylandridestheymustride,andtheorderinwhich
theymustridethem. Deviationfromthatorderwill likelyleadtoa
meltdown. For example, T.L.R. and A.T.W. must experience
Disneyland in the followingorder: (1)MatterhornBobsledsor Big
ThunderMountainRailroad; (2)SpaceMountain; (3)FindingNemo
Submarine Voyage (now closed) or Star Tours – The Adventure
Continues; (4) Autopia; and (5) Alice in Wonderland or Mad Tea
Party. If T.L.R. were to visit Disneyland and first visit Matterhorn
Bobsleds or Big Thunder Mountain Railroad, and if she were not
afforded the opportunity to first experience that ride, she would
likelyexperienceameltdown.
1628. T.L.R.’sdisordersalsocausehertohavetoexperiencecertainDisney
attractions repetitively. T.L.R. is a “repeat rider.” This is a
propensity commonamong autistic persons – a variety of theneed
for consistency, order and routine. T.L.R. will experience a
particular ride or attraction, such as Goofy’s Sky School or Grizzly
River Run, over and over, for several hours at a time. Disney
personnelareveryfamiliarwiththerepeatridertypeofguest.
1629. Similarly,ifT.L.R.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideor
attraction formore than a fewminutes, she alsowould likelymelt
down.
1630. Much like her brother, T.L.R. is incapable of understanding the
concept of visiting a ride or attraction only to be prohibited from
riding it until a future time. Thus, the new DAS creates avoidable
stressors for T.L.R., escalating her stimming patterns toward
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 224 of 334 Page ID #:843
Page225
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
meltdowns almost instantaneously. SinceDisney’s implementation
of the new DAS, T.L.R. has experienced several meltdowns at
Disneyland.
1631. ThefirstdayT.L.R.attendedtheparksaftertheDAScameintoeffect,
sheattendedwithR.C.R.,T.W.R.,andherbrotherA.T.W.,onOctober
12,2013.Uponarriving,T.W.R.andR.C.R.waited twohoursbefore
speaking to an employee at Guest Relations, and an additional 45
minutesinabackofficeofGuestRelationsatDisneyland.Whilethe
employee questioned R.C.R. and T.W.R. about T.L.R.’s disability,
T.L.R. experienced ameltdown towhich the employee said, “I see,”
beforeissuingaDAS.
1632. For the remainder of T.L.R.’s day at Disneyland, prevailing
conditions were misery and chaos. Disney employees and ride
operators exhibited a lack of training, did not know how to
implement the DAS, appeared consistently perplexed by the DAS
cards as they were presented to them, and generally displayed a
poor attitude toward disabled guests. The uniform response by
Disneyemployeesandrideoperatorsthatdaywas:“thisiswhatthe
policyisandthisishowweweretrained.”
1633. Aftervariouschaoticandstress‐inducingeventsthroughouttheday,
T.L.R.wasforcedtoleavetheparkwithR.C.R.,T.W.R.,andA.T.W.by
mid‐afternoon.Thefrustrationwastoomuchtobear.
1634. T.L.R.hasexperiencedembarrassmentatthehandsofDisneyandas
aconsequenceofDisney’snewfoundinabilitytoaccommodateher.
1635. DuetoDisney’sfailuretoaccommodatewhichleadstoanincreased
propensity for T.L.R. experiencing a meltdown, Defendant has
prevented T.L.R. from experiencing the full enjoyment of its Parks,
equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 225 of 334 Page ID #:844
Page226
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1636. After October 9, 2013, T.L.R. no longer received the type of
accommodation and attention T.L.R. and T.W.R. had receivedwhen
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.TheDAShasspecificallyadversely
impactedT.L.R.becauseadditionaltimemustbeexpendedinlineat
thestartofeachvisittoobtaintheDAS.
1637. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate T.L.R.’s needs, T.L.R. and T.W.R. have been
discouraged and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
park'sridesandattractions.T.W.R.wouldvisittheParkswithT.L.R.
more often if Disney had not abandoned its past policy of
accommodating the special needs of persons with cognitive
impairments. Their interest in attending the Parks is substantially
reduced. T.W.R. knows they should avoid attending the parks as
much in the future due to the expectation that the experiencewill
result in further discrimination against T.L.R., and will again be
thoroughlyun‐magicalandun‐accommodating.
1638. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate T.L.R.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessment ofT.L.R.'s capacity to utilize theDAS, andhave refused
to modify the DAS to allow T.L.R. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1639. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeT.L.R.
1640. T.W.R. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 226 of 334 Page ID #:845
Page227
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffT.L.R.byand throughT.W.R.,asT.L.R.'snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of T.L.R.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 227 of 334 Page ID #:846
Page228
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT159
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
T.L.R.v.Disney
1641. T.L.R. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1620through1640above.
1642. T.L.R. isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1643. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1644. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1645. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1646. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1647. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
T.L.R.’saccess toDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 228 of 334 Page ID #:847
Page229
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
1648. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs T.L.R. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of T.L.R.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 229 of 334 Page ID #:848
Page230
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.L.R. in the amount of her non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT160
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.L.R.v.Disney
1649. Plaintiff T.L.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1620through1640
above.
1650. During one or more visits to the Parks, T.L.R. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1651. The symptoms and conditions associated with T.L.R.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1652. T.L.R.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofT.L.R.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewT.L.R.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
1653. T.L.R.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
T.L.R. to experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 230 of 334 Page ID #:849
Page231
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffT.L.R.,byand throughT.W.R.asT.L.R.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
T.L.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.L.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.L.R. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT161
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.L.R.v.Disney
1654. Plaintiff T.L.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1620through1640
above.
1655. During one or more visits to the Parks, T.L.R. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1656. The symptoms and conditions associated with T.L.R.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1657. T.L.R.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of T.L.R. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
T.L.R. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 231 of 334 Page ID #:850
Page232
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1658. T.L.R.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
T.L.R. to experience the meltdown caused her grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffT.L.R.,byand throughT.W.R.asT.L.R.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponT.L.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.L.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.L.R. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT162
BreachofContract
T.W.R.v.Disney
1659. Plaintiff T.W.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1577through1600,and
1620through1640above.
1660. T.W.R. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 232 of 334 Page ID #:851
Page233
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1661. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1662. T.W.R. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.W.R. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithT.W.R..;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.W.R.in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT163
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.W.R.v.Disney
1663. Plaintiff T.W.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1577through1600,and
1620through1640above.
1664. Duringoneormorevisits to theParks,T.W.R.’sbelovedsonA.T.W.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinT.W.R.’spresence.
1665. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.T.W.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoA.T.W.underCalifornialaw.
1666. A.T.W.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.T.W.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.T.W.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 233 of 334 Page ID #:852
Page234
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1667. T.W.R. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
A.T.W.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularlyinlight
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,T.W.R.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1668. T.W.R.’s observation of A.T.W.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.T.W. to
experience themeltdown caused T.W.R. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.W.R. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
T.W.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.W.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.W.R. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT164
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.C.R.v.Disney
1669. Plaintiff R.C.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1577through1600,and
1620through1640above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 234 of 334 Page ID #:853
Page235
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1670. During one ormore visits to the Parks, R.C.R.’s beloved sonA.T.W.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinR.C.R.’spresence.
1671. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.T.W.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoA.T.W.underCalifornialaw.
1672. A.T.W.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.T.W.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.T.W.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
1673. R.C.R. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
A.T.W.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularlyinlight
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,R.C.R.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1674. R.C.R.’s observation of A.T.W.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.T.W. to
experience the meltdown caused R.C.R. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.C.R. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
R.C.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.C.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.C.R. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 235 of 334 Page ID #:854
Page236
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT165
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.W.R.v.Disney
1675. Plaintiff T.W.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,1577through1600,and
1620through1640above.
1676. Duringoneormorevisits to theParks,T.W.R.’sbelovedsonA.T.W.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
1677. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.T.W.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1678. A.T.W.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.T.W. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.T.W. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1679. T.W.R. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdown,
A.T.W.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularlyinlight
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,T.W.R.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1680. T.W.R.’s observation of A.T.W.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.T.W. to
experience themeltdown caused T.W.R. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 236 of 334 Page ID #:855
Page237
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.W.R. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponT.W.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.W.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.W.R. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT166
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.C.R.v.Disney
1681. Plaintiff R.C.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,1577through1600,and
1620through1640above.
1682. During one ormore visits to the Parks, R.C.R.’s beloved sonA.T.W.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
1683. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.T.W.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1684. A.T.W.’smeltdownintheParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.T.W. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.T.W. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 237 of 334 Page ID #:856
Page238
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1685. R.C.R. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
A.T.W.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularlyinlight
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardhis
son,R.C.R.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
1686. R.C.R.’s observation of A.T.W.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.T.W. to
experience the meltdown caused R.C.R. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.C.R. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponR.C.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.C.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.C.R. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 238 of 334 Page ID #:857
Page239
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT167
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.C.R.v.Disney
1687. Plaintiff J.C.R. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1688. J.C.R.hasautism. J.C.R.’s stimmingpatterns include facial grimacing
and hand flapping. During behavior meltdowns J.C.R. exhibits
generally aggressive behavior toward hismother, K.T.R. J.C.R. will
alsofalltothegroundandflailaboutwildlyandscreamloudly.
1689. J.C.R.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
1690. J.C.R. is fiveyearsof ageand is generally in the careofhismother,
K.T.R., who brings this action as J.C.R.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1691. K.T.R.andJ.C.R.areresidentsofSuffolkCounty,NewYork.
1692. K.T.R. grew up a Disney lover and had been to the Disney Parks
manytimesasachildandhadalwayshadgreatmemories.
1693. K.T.R.firsttookJ.C.R.toWaltDisneyWorldMarch11,2014,afterthe
DAShadalreadybeenimplemented.K.T.R.hadheardabouttheGAC
during 2013 and before, and this ability to accommodate children
with cognitive impairments such as J.T.R. was just the kind of
accommodation she expected to receive when she booked her
Disney vacation and purchased her and her family’s tickets for the
DisneyParks.SheacceptedandanticipatedthejoysoftheGAC,and
notthehorrorsoftheDAS.
1694. J.C.R.’s cognitive impairments manifested themselves in a certain
way during his visits to the parks; J.C.R. lacks the ability to reason
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 239 of 334 Page ID #:858
Page240
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
and plan ahead. Impulsive in nature, when J.C.R. sees a ride or
exhibithewantstoexperience,hehasnochoicebuttoexperienceit
inthatmomentandcannotprocesstheideaofcomingbackinorder
to experience it later. Because J.C.R. is incapable of understanding
the concept of visiting a ride or attraction, only to be prohibited
fromridingituntilafuturetime,theDAScreatesavoidablestressors
forJ.C.R.,escalatinghisstimmingpatternstowardmeltdownsalmost
instantaneously.Forexample,uponbeingtakentoarideandasked
tocomebackin45minutes,hewouldbeginscreaming“Iwanttogo!
I want to go now!” before experiencing a meltdown. Once in
meltdown mode, J.T.R. would then begin screaming and flailing,
beforeeventually fallingtothegroundandcontinuingto flailabout
wildly. Indeed, under Disney’s DAS, K.T.W. experienced several
meltdownsatWaltDisneyWorldduringhisMarch2014visitstothe
DisneyParks.
1695. The first meltdown took place shortly after arriving at the Disney
Parks on March 11, 2014. Upon arriving at the Magic Kingdom,
K.T.R. then encountered a one‐hourwait at Guest Relations as she
waitedtospeakwithanemployeeonlytodiscovertheGACshehad
anticipatedreceivingwasnolongeravailable.Crystal,theemployee,
explained that theDAShadreplaced theGAC,andbeganexplaining
howitworked.K.T.R.immediatelyexpressedherconcern,tellingthe
employee this new system would never work for J.T.R. The
employee took J.T.R. aside to have his picture taken. This event
causedameltdownforJ.T.R.
1696. J.T.R.andK.T.R.receivedtheirfirstreturntimeforBuzzLightyear’s
Space Ranger Spin: 1:48 p.m. Breakfast had been at 9:45 a.m., yet
K.T.R.wouldnotbephysicallyonarideuntil1:48p.m.Hopingfora
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 240 of 334 Page ID #:859
Page241
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
miracle,K.T.R.tookJ.T.R.totheentranceofBuzzLightyearat12:30
p.m.NosuchDisneymiraclewasavailable today:1:48p.m.was the
return timewithout exception.Wanting to ride the ride right then
andthere,andnotcomebackat1:48p.m.,J.T.R.experiencedanother
meltdown.Now,almostthreehoursintotheirDisneytrip,J.T.R.had
notbeenonasingleDisneyride.
1697. Overthecourseofafive‐dayDisneyvacation,J.T.R.rodeatotalof20
ridesandexperienced25meltdowns.
1698. Due to Disney’s failure to accommodate and arbitrary policies
toward disabled guests such as J.T.R. which leads to an increased
propensityforJ.T.R.experiencingameltdown,Disneyhasprevented
J.T.R from obtaining the full enjoyment of its Parks, equal to the
experiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
1699. K.T.R.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
1700. J.C.R. and K.T.R. have already visited the Parks considerably less
frequently than theydid in thepast, a situationwhich continues to
this day. Their interest in attending Disney Parks is substantially
reduced. Theywill not attend the Parks in the future due to their
expectation that the experience will again include discrimination
against J.C.R., and that the event will be supremely un‐
accommodating.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.C.R.,byandthroughK.T.R.ashisnextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.C.R.’s disability;
and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 241 of 334 Page ID #:860
Page242
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT168
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.C.R.v.Disney
1701. Plaintiff J.C.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1688through1700
above.
1702. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.C.R. suffered an actual
meltdown.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 242 of 334 Page ID #:861
Page243
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1703. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.C.R.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1704. J.C.R.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofJ.C.R.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewJ.C.R. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated in sucha
mannerbyanyone.
1705. J.C.R.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.C.R.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.C.R., by and through K.T.R. as J.C.R.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
J.C.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.C.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.C.R. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 243 of 334 Page ID #:862
Page244
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT169
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.C.R.v.Disney
1706. Plaintiff J.C.R. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1688through1700
above.
1707. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.C.R. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1708. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.C.R.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1709. J.C.R.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.C.R. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.C.R.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
1710. J.C.R.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.C.R.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.C.R., by and through K.T.R. as J.C.R.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponJ.C.R.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.C.R.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.C.R. in the amount of such
damages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 244 of 334 Page ID #:863
Page245
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT170
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.D.S.v.Disney
1711. Plaintiff J.D.S. incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1 through66,
68,and651through654above.
1712. J.D.S. has autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD). J.D.S. is largely non‐verbal, possessing only the ability to
make loud noises tomirror emotions such as fear and excitement.
J.D.S.’s symptoms and stimming behaviors include the inability to
staystill,elopement,utteringloudnoises,andimpulsivetouchingof
people’s faces. Behavior meltdowns for J.D.S. are physical and
tantrum‐centered; he will scream loudly, strike out physically
against himself by hitting his own head or his mother, and/or
convulseandspasmbeforeeventuallydroppingtotheground.
1713. J.D.S.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
1714. J.D.S.iseightyearsofageandisgenerallyinthecareofhismother,
R.E.S., who brings this action as J.D.S.’s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1715. R.E.S.andJ.D.S.areresidentsofDuvalCounty,Florida.
1716. Formany years leadingup toOctober of 2013, from the time J.D.S.
wasatoddler,J.D.S.andR.E.S.visitedtheWaltDisneyWorldParksa
few times a year. J.D.S. was a “Disney Baby,” carried the Guest
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 245 of 334 Page ID #:864
Page246
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Assistance Card, and was admirably accommodated. During those
visits, J.D.S. exhibited a nature and extent of joy that he rarely
showed inanyothersetting. R.E.S.wasalwaysproudand joyfulof
the opportunity to bring to her beloved child a level of happiness
whichherarelyshowedelsewhere.Disneyistheonlyexperiencein
life that gives J.D.S. visible excitement; Toy Story having the most
dramaticeffectbyfar.
1717. In 2012, R.E.S. and J.D.S. obtained annual passes for Walt Disney
WorldandvisitedtheDisneyParksmultipletimesperyearbetween
2012 and 2014. J.D.S. rarely experienced behavioral meltdowns
during his visits to Walt Disney World prior to February of 2014
whentheyexperienced,forthefirsttime,thehorrorsoftheDAS.
1718. J.D.S.’s impairmentcompletely inhibitshisability towait in line for
longer than a few minutes. If J.D.S. were required to idly wait for
entryintoarideorattractionformorethanafewminuteshewould
likelymeltdown.
1719. J.D.S.isalsoincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitingaride
orattractiononlytobeprohibitedfromridingituntilafuturetime.
Consequently, the new DAS creates avoidable stressors for J.D.S.
escalating his stimming patterns towardmeltdowns in amatter of
minutes. SinceDisney’s implementation of the newDAS, J.D.S. has
experiencedseveralmeltdownsattheDisneyParks.
1720. Duringthefallof2013,R.E.S.learnedofDisney’sintenttoeliminate
theGACinfavoroftheDAS. R.E.S.plannedatripinFebruary2014
totrytheDAS.R.E.S.trustedDisneyandbelievedDisneywouldonly
do what was best for J.D.S. and other disabled children like him.
Sadly,thisonevisitwouldbesohorriblethattheywouldvownever
toreturntotheDisneyParks–atleastnotwhiletheDASisinplace.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 246 of 334 Page ID #:865
Page247
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1721. InFebruaryof2014,thefirstpost‐DAStripstartedwitha20‐minute
wait atGuestRelations, afterwhich they receivedabrief and short
descriptionbytheemployeeofhowtheDASworked.
1722. Next, R.E.S. and J.D.S. made their way to Buzz Lightyear’s Space
Ranger Spin, where the Disney ride operator glanced at their DAS
cardbeforerecommending theywait in theregular lineas itwould
“not be that long.”Not surprisingly, thewaitwas very long, during
which time R.E.S. tried her best to keep J.D.S from experiencing a
meltdown. But after 15 minutes of just waiting, J.D.S.’s patterns
ensued as he began kicking, screaming, and jumping while in the
line.
1723. R.E.S. and J.D.S. thenwent to Astro Orbiter. Again, the Disney ride
operator suggested they wait in the regular line and not use their
DAS card. R.E.S., assuming the Disney ride operator had only the
guests’bestinterestatheart,heededtheemployee’sadvice,andwas
once again sorely disappointed. After 15minutes,déjà vu set in as
R.E.S.andJ.D.S.foundthemselvesstillwaitinginalongline,making
little progress, with J.D.S.’s stimming behaviors steadily increasing
towardmeltdown.
1724. Afterthissecondhorribleexperience,R.E.S.decidednomatterwhat,
theywouldusetheirDAScardat thenextride.Theyreceiveda30‐
minute return time at The Barnstormer. However, in that 30
minutes,itwasnexttoimpossibletokeepJ.D.S.fromexperiencinga
meltdown. J.D.S. cannot go into gift shops because he will become
anxiousandbegingrabbingat itemswhichwilleventuallybe taken
or broken, resulting in R.E.S. having to expendmoremoney to pay
fortheseitems.J.D.S.cannotsitidly,asthiswillleadtoameltdown.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 247 of 334 Page ID #:866
Page248
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1725. Faced with few options, R.E.S. took J.D.S. to Dumbo the Flying
Elephant. To R.E.S.’s surprise, there was no DAS or FastPass
entrance, and no return time. Instead, waiting to ride Dumbo the
Flying Elephant would require J.D.S. to wait in a long line to then
receiveabuzzerwhichwouldalertR.E.S.whenitwastimetogointo
thenextroomandwaitinanevenlonger,secondline.Intheinterim,
R.E.S.andJ.D.S.wouldberequiredtowaitinalargeplayroomwith
other children and stimuli all around; this truly being the ultimate
stressor forparentsofchildrenwithcognitive impairmentssuchas
R.E.S. and J.D.S., and sure to lead to a meltdown, J.D.S injuring
himself in one of themany areas in the play house safe for a non‐
disabledchild,butnotJ.D.S.R.E.S.askedarideoperatoriftheycould
skipthispartofride,onlytobetolditwaspartoftherideandthey
“neededtowait.”R.E.S.andJ.D.S.decidedtowaitinline,sincethere
was no easy exit route available. After the Dumbo ride, R.E.S. and
J.D.S. went to The Barnstormer, where they encountered an
additional 40‐minute wait. The successive periods of intolerable
waitsanddisordercausedJ.D.S.toagainmeltdown,morethanonce.
1726. Unable to bear continuing to subject J.D.S. to these stressors and
meltdowns, R.E.S. began to frantically search for attractions with
shortlinesorreturntimes.Noneweretobefound.R.E.S.andJ.D.S.
lefttheparkby2:00p.m.,defeated,dejected,anddisenchanted.
1727. DuringpriortripswiththeGAC,R.E.S.andJ.D.S.wereabletostayin
theparkuntil10:00p.m.,visitmorethantwoattractions,andwatch
the fireworks, essentially likenon‐disabled guests. Under theDAS,
afteronlytworides,J.D.S.andR.E.S.fledtheparkby2:00p.m.after
ridingonlytworides,andexperiencingmultiplemeltdowns.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 248 of 334 Page ID #:867
Page249
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1728. R.E.S.hadanentireweekendplannedforJ.D.S.However,aftertheir
first nightmarish day at the Disney Parks, R.E.S. and her husband
decided to cut the trip short, return home, and shortly thereafter,
canceltheirannualpasses.
1729. DuetoDisney’sfailuretoaccommodatewhichleadstoanincreased
propensity for J.D.S. experiencing a meltdown, Defendant has
prevented J.D.S. from experiencing the full enjoyment of its Parks,
equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
1730. After October 9, 2013, J.D.S. no longer received the type of
accommodation and attention J.D.S. and R.E.S. had received when
theyvisitedtheParksinthepast.TheDAShasspecificallyadversely
impacted J.D.S.because itoffered little tonooptions for J.D.S. tobe
able to ride the rides; he is unable towait in the extended regular
linesandjustasunabletoidlywaitandbidetimeuntilascheduled
returnappointment.
1731. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate J.D.S.’s needs, J.D.S. andR.E.S. havebeendiscouraged
anddeterredfromthefulluseandenjoymentofthepark'sridesand
attractions. R.E.S.would visit the Parkswith J.D.S.more often had
Disneynot abandoned itspastpolicyof accommodating the special
needs of persons with cognitive impairments. R.E.S. cancelled the
family’s annual passes because she knows they should avoid
returning to the Parks, at least while Disney continues to operate
underitsDAS.ShereasonablyexpectsthatanothertriptotheParks
would include further discrimination against J.D.S., and would be
anotherun‐magicalandun‐accommodatingday.
1732. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 249 of 334 Page ID #:868
Page250
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate J.D.S.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessmentofJ.D.S.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefusedto
modify the DAS to allow J.D.S. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1733. Disney personnel have shown no willingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeJ.D.S.
1734. R.E.S.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.D.S.,byandthroughR.E.S.ashisnextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.D.S.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 250 of 334 Page ID #:869
Page251
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT171
BreachofContract
R.E.S.v.Disney
1735. Plaintiff R.E.S. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1712through1734
above.
1736. R.E.S. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1737. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1738. R.E.S.incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffR.E.S.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethis
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithR.E.S.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.E.S. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 251 of 334 Page ID #:870
Page252
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT172
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.D.S.v.Disney
1739. Plaintiff J.D.S. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1712through1734
above.
1740. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.D.S. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1741. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.D.S.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1742. J.D.S.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofJ.D.S.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knew J.D.S. tobevulnerable toemotional injury if treated insucha
mannerbyanyone.
1743. J.D.S.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.D.S.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.D.S., by and through R.E.S. as J.D.S.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
J.D.S.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.D.S.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.D.S. in the amount of such
damages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 252 of 334 Page ID #:871
Page253
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT173
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.D.S.v.Disney
1744. Plaintiff J.D.S. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1712through1734
above.
1745. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.D.S. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1746. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.D.S.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1747. J.D.S.’smeltdown in the Parkswas proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.D.S. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.D.S.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
1748. J.D.S.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedJ.D.S.
to experience themeltdown caused him grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.D.S., by and through R.E.S. as J.D.S.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponJ.D.S.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 253 of 334 Page ID #:872
Page254
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.D.S.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.D.S. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT174
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
A.M.W.v.Disney
1749. Plaintiff A.M.W. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through
66,68,and651through654above.
1750. A.M.W.hasautismspectrumdisorder.Hercognitivedisabilitiesarea
resultofpermanentbraindamageshesufferedwhensheunderwent
heart surgery when she was one month old and her surgeon
inadvertently severed a nerve that wraps around her heart. The
eventalso led toparalysisofhervocal foldsandaresultingairway
obstruction, which in turn, led to her airway being obstructed.
A.M.W. spent her first six years on and off of life‐support systems.
She is deaf, non‐verbal, and suffers from seizures. A.M.W.’s
conditions sometimes have the effect of causing A.M.W. to lose the
abilitytobreathe,thusrequiringtheuseofanoxygenbagandmask.
1751. A.M.W. also experiences behavioral meltdowns, which generally
consistofcryingandsevereself‐abusivebehavior.
1752. A.M.W. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 254 of 334 Page ID #:873
Page255
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1753. A.M.W. is 19 years old and is generally in the care of her mother,
D.L.W., who brings this action as A.M.W.'s next friend, parent and
naturalguardian.
1754. A.M.W.andD.L.W.areresidentsofLosAngelesCounty,California.
1755. DuetoA.M.W.’simpairments,shespentmostofherchildhoodyears
either at home or at hospitals, until age eleven. D.L.W. constantly
weighed the risks of respiratory issues and behavioral meltdowns
againsttherewardofengagingA.M.W.innewsocialactivities.When
A.M.W.’s medical condition was sufficiently stable, D.L.W. started
taking A.M.W. to the Disneyland parks. Thereafter, all of A.M.W.’s
birthdayswerecelebratedattheDisneyParks.
1756. Since their first visit to the Parks, A.M.W.’s favorite thing in the
worldwasDisneyland. A.M.W. exhibited a nature and extent of joy
that she just did not experience in any other setting. She would
visibly lightup andglowduring their visits.Noplace elseon earth
hadevermadeA.M.W.thathappy.Duringthattime,A.M.W.received
theGACandwasadmirablyaccommodated.
1757. Due toA.M.W.’s impairments, she isunable to stay in theParks for
long periods of time, because doing so increases the risk that she
willexperienceameltdown,ormuchworse,respiratoryarrest.The
GAC allowed A.M.W. and D.L.W. to go to the Disney Parks, enjoy
considerableexperiencesinashortperiodoftime,andreturnhome
withoutworrythathermedicalconditionswouldinterferewithher
day. D.L.W.wasproudandjoyfuloftheopportunitytobringtoher
beloved daughter a level of happiness which she rarely showed
elsewhere.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 255 of 334 Page ID #:874
Page256
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1758. Five years ago, D.L.W. purchased Disneyland annual passes for
A.M.W.andherfamily.D.L.W.andA.M.W.visitedtheparksbetween
sixtoeighttimesperyear,dependingonA.M.W.’shealth.
1759. Their visits to Disneyland with the GAC were brief, but enjoyable.
WhileD.L.W.wouldhavetocarryA.M.W.’semergencybagwiththem
the throughout every visit, in case A.M.W. had a respiratory event,
sherarelyneededtouse itbecausetheGACallowedquickeraccess
totherides,lesstimewalkingaroundtheParksbeingexposedtothe
elements, lesstimewaitingin linearoundotherguests,andoverall,
theabilitytoenjoytheDisneyParksthesameasother,non‐disabled
guestswereabletoenjoytheDisneyParks.
1760. Given A.M.W.’s fragile condition, disaster could not always be
avoided.DuringoneoftheirDisneylandvisits,whentheGACsystem
was still in place, while in the FastPass Line at Space Mountain,
A.M.W.went into respiratory arrest. A.M.W. had visitedDisneyland
with her family for her birthday,without knowing thatDisney had
changeditsusualGACpolicy,byprohibitingaguestwithaGACtogo
through theFastPass lane, and requiringguests touse thedisabled
line instead. A.M.W.’s family had not been informed of this change
until they arrived at Space Mountain and the employee directed
them to the disabled line. From said location, the ride was not
visible.Becauseofthis,A.M.W.interpretedtheirwalkingawayfrom
therideentrancetomeanthattheywerenotgoingontherideatall.
This resulted in a major meltdown, wherein A.M.W. started
screaming, jumpeduptothrowherselfontoherkneesandontothe
floor, and started banging her head on the concrete. Although the
employee saw the entire episode, including the fact that A.M.W.’s
family was struggling to calm her down, and that A.M.W. was
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 256 of 334 Page ID #:875
Page257
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
bleeding by that point, the Disney employee did not even use her
walkie‐talkie to ask if an exception could be made to their new
policy.
1761. After the calamitous andheartbreaking episode at SpaceMountain,
and Disney’s employee’s unbelievable lack of inclination to be
flexible,onceA.M.W.calmeddown,A.M.W.’sfamilywenttoCityHall
andexplainedwhatoccurred.TheemployeesatCityHallapologized
profusely and to prevent a similar effect from happening in the
future, A.M.W.was given a “Green Light Pass”, bywhich she could
usewhicheverlinewasthemostconvenientfortheirfamily.
1762. Afterbeingprovidedwith aGreenLightPass,A.M.W.’s experiences
at Disneyland were even more magical. More attractions became
accessible to A.M.W. for her short three‐to‐four‐hour stays.
Additionally, because of this wonderful accommodation, A.M.W.
sufferednoadditionalmeltdownsorbreathing issueswhilevisiting
theoneplacewhereshecouldtrulyenjoyherchildhood.
1763. This changed drastically on October 10, 2014when A.M.W. visited
Disneyland. The family had booked a Disney hotel for three nights
forA.M.W’sbirthdaytripthefollowingweek.Theyhadheardabout
theDAS,andwantedtoseeinadvanceifitwouldworkforA.M.W,or
if they would have to cancel the birthday reservations. While at
Guest Relations, employees informedD.L.W. that neither the Green
Light nor the GAC accommodations were available; the only
availableaccommodationistheDAS.
1764. D.L.W. was aware of changes to Disney’s policies beforehand
because she called Disney on multiple occasions before their trip.
During these calls, shewaspromised thatA.M.W.would receivean
individualized accommodation once she arrived at Disneyland.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 257 of 334 Page ID #:876
Page258
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
During that October visit, D.L.W. realized that Disney’s assurances
couldnothavebeenfurtherfromthetruth.
1765. While D.L.W. attempted to check in A.M.W. at Guest Relations, she
asked to speak in a private room, as opposed to having to discuss
A.M.W.’simpairmentsinfrontofotherguests.Bythetimethetaxing
Guest Relations check‐in processwas complete, and A.M.W. visited
one attraction, the family had been at Disneyland for about three
hours,veryclosetoA.M.W.’sphysicallimit.
1766. A.M.W.’s cognitive impairmentshavealwaysmanifested themselves
inacertainwayduringthefamily’svisitstotheParks.A.M.W.must
experience thepark in a specific order, anddisruptions inherpre‐
planned routine will trend A.M.W. toward self‐harmingmeltdowns
or respiratory events. For A.M.W., every trip to Disneyland must
beginwithavisittothejewelrystoretopurchaseapieceofjewelry
or awatch for A.M.W. towear. Deviation from her routine causes
her heightened anxiety and a manifestation of her medical
conditions.
1767. When A.M.W. suffers a respiratory event, she stops breathing and
requiresanoxygenmaskandambubaguntil she isable tobreathe
on her own. These events generally last between three and 20
minutes, but can last as longas50minutes. If shedoesnot regain
the ability to breathe onher ownwithin a certainwindowof time,
she loses consciousness and experiences seizures, which makes
resuscitation far more difficult. Placing A.M.W. in stressful or
frustrating experiences increases A.M.W.’s risk of suffering such
episodes.
1768. During the October 10, 2013 visit, the family arrived at their first
ride,Piratesof theCaribbean, at theirdesignated time. D.L.W. and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 258 of 334 Page ID #:877
Page259
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
A.M.W. were placed in a separate wait line for disabled guests,
separate from the ordinary standby line. There was no FastPass
Line. The posted wait time listed for the standby line was 30
minutes. Even though D.L.W. and A.M.W. arrived on time for their
appointmentattheride,theywaitedbetween30and40minutesto
gainadmission.
1769. Next, D.L.W. and A.M.W. visited one of the Parks’ kiosks to pick a
return time for a new ride. Facing return times too late in theday,
andexceedingthetimetheycouldsafelystayinthepark,D.L.W.and
A.M.W. decided to use their FastPasses atHauntedMansion. Again,
theywereplaced in thedisabled lineandenduredawait time that
exceededthewaittimeoftheordinarystandbyline.
1770. Theyreturned toakiosk fora third time.Their return time for the
Peter Pan ride would have been 50 minutes later. By this time,
A.M.W.’sfamilycouldseephysicalchangesinA.M.W.,whoappeared
tiredandunstable.D.L.W.decidedtheyhadtoleavethepark.
1771. AsthefamilyexitedDisneyland,D.L.W.stoppedatCityHalltospeak
with a supervisor. An employee named Dave Atkins spoke with
D.L.W. at the City Hall steps. During the conversation, A.M.W.
collapsed and went into respiratory arrest, right in front of Mr.
Atkins,duringtheheightoftheMainStreetParade.
1772. Disney employees rushed to the scene and cleared a restroom of
guests, and A.M.W.’s father, R.D.W.,went into the restroom to help
D.L.W.resuscitateA.M.W.
1773. Mr. Atkins called for a van to take A.M.W.’s family out of the park.
During this time, he promised to be an advocate for A.M.W. in the
future, taking it “all theway to the top ifhehave to,”andsaid they
wouldbeintouch.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 259 of 334 Page ID #:878
Page260
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1774. Subsequently, during a phone conversation with Mr. Atkins and
R.D.W.,Mr.AtkinstoldR.D.W.thattherewasnothinghecoulddofor
A.M.W. He suggested they consider one of two options: (1) cancel
their annual passes and not be charged; or (2) put their passes on
hold into2014and checkback to see if anythinghad changed.The
second option would still require monthly payments, though,
because“anoutsidecompanyhandlesthepayments.”
1775. Despite these disastrous events, A.M.W. and her family have
returnedtoDisneylandontwooccasions,onlyforacoupleofhours
per visit; and they have encountered the same unaccommodating
experience.
1776. DuetoitsfailuretoreasonablyaccommodateA.M.W.,Defendanthas
preventedA.M.W.fromexperiencingthefullenjoymentofitsParks,
equaltotheexperiencesaffordedtopersonswithoutadisability.
1777. Asa resultofDisney’s refusal tomodify itsprocedures,A.M.W.and
D.L.W. have been deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
Parks’ rides and attractions. D.L.W. would visit Disneyland with
A.M.W. more often if Disney had not abandoned its past policy of
accommodating the special needs of persons with cognitive and
othermedical impairments. D.L.W. knows her family should avoid
travelingtotheparksinthefutureduetothereasonableexpectation
thatDisneywill takeno steps toaccommodateA.M.W. and that the
visitwillonceagainbeadisaster.
1778. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate A.M.W.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessmentofA.M.W.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefused
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 260 of 334 Page ID #:879
Page261
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
tomodify the DAS to allow A.M.W. to enjoy the same benefits and
privilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1779. D.L.W. now hides pictures of Disneyland from A.M.W. to keep her
fromaskingtoreturntotheparks.D.L.W.knowsshecannotexpose
her daughter to the heinous risks associated with another trip to
DisneylandundertheDAS.
1780. Disney personnel have shown no willingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeA.M.W.
1781. D.L.W. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff A.M.W. by and through D.L.W., as A.M.W.'s
next friend,parentandnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate
thisdisputeandenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiff onaccountofA.M.W.’sdisability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 261 of 334 Page ID #:880
Page262
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT175
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
A.M.W.v.Disney
1782. A.M.W. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1750through1781above.
1783. A.M.W.isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1784. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1785. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1786. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1787. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 262 of 334 Page ID #:881
Page263
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1788. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
A.M.W.’saccesstoDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities.Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairmentsandlife‐threateningmedicalcondition.
1789. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs A.M.W. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiffsonaccountofA.M.W.’sdisability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 263 of 334 Page ID #:882
Page264
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment forPlaintiffA.M.W. in theamountofhisnon‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT176
BreachofContract
D.L.W.v.Disney
1790. Plaintiff D.L.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1750through1781
above.
1791. D.L.W. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 264 of 334 Page ID #:883
Page265
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1792. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1793. D.L.W. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.L.W. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithD.L.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.L.W. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT177
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
A.M.W.v.Disney
1794. Plaintiff A.M.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1750through1781
above.
1795. During one or more visits to the Parks, A.M.W. suffered an actual
episode.
1796. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.W.’s episodes
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1797. A.M.W.’sepisodesintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.M.W.
during her patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.M.W. tobevulnerable to emotional injury if treated
insuchamannerbyanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 265 of 334 Page ID #:884
Page266
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1798. A.M.W.’s episodes and the treatment which proximately caused
A.M.W. to experience the episodes caused her grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff A.M.W., by and through D.L.W. as A.M.W.’s
next friend,parentandnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate
thisdisputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
A.M.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoA.M.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.M.W. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT178
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
A.M.W.v.Disney
1799. Plaintiff A.M.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1750through1781
above.
1800. During one or more visits to the Parks, A.M.W. suffered an actual
episode.
1801. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.W.’s episodes
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1802. A.M.W.’sepisodesintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.M.W. during her
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 266 of 334 Page ID #:885
Page267
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.M.W. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1803. A.M.W.’s episodes and the treatment which proximately caused
A.M.W. to experience the episodes caused her grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff A.M.W., by and through D.L.W. as A.M.W.’s
next friend,parentandnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate
thisdisputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponA.M.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoA.M.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff A.M.W. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT179
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.L.W.v.Disney
1804. Plaintiff D.L.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1750through1781
above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 267 of 334 Page ID #:886
Page268
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1805. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.L.W.’s beloved daughter
A.M.W.sufferedanepisodewhileinD.L.W.’spresence.
1806. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.W.’s episodes
constituteaphysicalinjurytoA.M.W.underCalifornialaw.
1807. A.M.W.’sepisodesintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.M.W.
during her patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.M.W. tobevulnerable to emotional injury if treated
insuchamannerbyanyone.
1808. D.L.W. directly observed the stressors leading up to A.M.W.’s
respiratory arrest. Particularly in light of her trust and confidence
thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable lawandact inagracious
and caring manner toward her daughter, D.L.W. could do nothing
reasonabletopreventtheepisode.
1809. D.L.W.’s observation of A.M.W.’s episodes and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.M.W. to
experience the episodes caused D.L.W. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.L.W. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
D.L.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.L.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.L.W. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 268 of 334 Page ID #:887
Page269
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT180
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.L.W.v.Disney
1810. Plaintiff D.L.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1750through1781
above.
1811. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.L.W.’s beloved daughter
A.M.W.sufferedanactualepisode.
1812. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.W.’s episodes
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1813. A.M.W.’sepisodesintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.M.W. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.M.W. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1814. D.L.W. directly observed the stressors leading up to the episodes,
A.M.W.’s resultingescalationandherepisodes. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
daughter, D.L.W. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
episodes.
1815. D.L.W.’s observation of A.M.W.’s episodes and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.M.W. to
experience the episodes caused D.L.W. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 269 of 334 Page ID #:888
Page270
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff D.L.W. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponD.L.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.L.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.L.W. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT181
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.D.W.v.Disney
1816. Plaintiff R.D.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1750through1781
above.
1817. During one or more visits to the Parks, R.D.W.’s beloved daughter
A.M.W.sufferedanepisodewhileinR.D.W.’spresence.
1818. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.W.’s episodes
constituteaphysicalinjurytoA.M.W.underCalifornialaw.
1819. A.M.W.’sepisodesintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of A.M.W.
during her patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewA.M.W. tobevulnerable to emotional injury if treated
insuchamannerbyanyone.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 270 of 334 Page ID #:889
Page271
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1820. R.D.W. directly observed the stressors leading up to the episodes,
A.M.W.’sresultingescalationandherepisode.Particularlyinlightof
his trust and confidence thatDisneywould complywith applicable
law and act in a gracious and caringmanner toward his daughter,
R.D.W.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventtheepisodes.
1821. R.D.W.’s observation of A.M.W.’s episodes and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.M.W. to
experience the episodes caused R.D.W. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.D.W. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
R.D.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.D.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.D.W. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT182
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
R.D.W.v.Disney
1822. Plaintiff R.D.W. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1750through1781
above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 271 of 334 Page ID #:890
Page272
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1823. During one or more visits to the Parks, R.D.W.’s beloved daughter
A.M.W.sufferedanactualepisode.
1824. The symptoms and conditions associated with A.M.W.’s episodes
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
1825. A.M.W.’sepisodesintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of A.M.W. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
A.M.W. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1826. R.D.W. directly observed the stressors leading up to the episodes,
A.M.W.’s resultingescalationandherepisodes. Particularly in light
of his trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable law and act in a gracious and caringmanner towardhis
daughter, R.D.W. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
episode.
1827. R.D.W.’s observation of A.M.W.’s episodes and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused A.M.W. to
experience the episode caused R.D.W. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff R.D.W. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponR.D.W.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoR.D.W.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff R.D.W. in the amount of such
damages;
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 272 of 334 Page ID #:891
Page273
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT183
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
A.C.W.v.Disney
1828. PlaintiffA.C.W.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1829. A.C.W. has severe autism spectrum disorder. He has a severe
communicativedisorder and isnon‐verbal, prone to severe anxiety
uponadisruptionofhisroutines.
1830. A.C.W. is17yearsofageand isgenerally in thecareofhismother,
C.A.W., who brings this action as A.C.W.’s parent, next friend, and
naturalguardian.
1831. A.C.W.andC.A.W.areresidentsofOrangeCounty,California.
1832. For approximately twelve years leading up to October of 2013,
C.A.W. and A.C.W. visited the Disney Parks, including Disneyland,
and were admirably accommodated. During those visits, A.C.W.
thoroughlyenjoyedtheDisneyParks.
1833. ThisdrasticallychangedinOctoberof2013whenDisneyrolledout
their Disability Access Service. Since Disney’s DAS was released,
C.A.W. has reasonably become terrified of taking A.C.W. to the
DisneyParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 273 of 334 Page ID #:892
Page274
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1834. A.C.W.’scognitiveimpairmentsmanifestthemselvesinacertainway
duringhisvisitstothemeparks.
1835. A.C.W. cannot tolerate arriving at a ride he has his heart set on
riding,onlytobetoldhewillhavetocomebackataspecifictimein
the future. Likeotherautisticpersons,A.C.W.cannotmakeorkeep
appointments.
1836. WhenA.C.W. is exposed to stressors, his stimming behavior begins
and escalates as exposure to the stressor continues. Unless the
stressorisremovedorA.C.W.isremoved,heislikelytoexperiencea
meltdown. WhenA.C.W.’s anxiety peaks to the point ofmeltdown,
he becomes extremely agitated, grabbing or pushing away, and he
willnotmoveorcooperatewithanyrequests.Hebecomesloud,but
in a communicative manner; rather, he emits a soliloquy of
gibberish. A.C.W.’s anxiety grows worse upon observing other
peoplestaringathim. WhenA.C.W.’sanxietyreaches itsmaximum,
hewillrunoff,orelope,inthefirstdirectionhecan.
1837. Over time, as is the casewith anymother of a cognitively disabled
child, C.A.W. hasbecomevery familiarwithA.C.W.’s stressors. She
knowstoprotectA.C.W.fromexactlythetypeofexperiencetowhich
Disneywould subject him – idlewait times and rigid sequences of
rides and experiences. The family has occasionally tested A.C.W.’s
ability to idly wait in a queue or ride rides in differing orders at
other theme parks. If A.C.W.were prevented from riding a ride he
had his heart set on riding in thatmoment, hewould experience a
meltdown.
1838. A.C.W. was two years old when he first visited the Disney Parks.
Thereafter,untilOctober9,2013,hevisitedDisneylandacoupleof
times per year. The first few years C.A.W. carried A.M.W.’s GAC;
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 274 of 334 Page ID #:893
Page275
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
later, the Green Light Pass. There was never any problem with
obtainingadmissionuntilthefamily’slastvisit,onFebruary2,2014.
1839. C.A.W.wentGuestRelationswithA.C.W.C.A.W.spoketoamanager,
Taylor, and advised him of A.C.W.’s disability and the
accommodations he requires. She also handed him the old pass,
whichhetookawayfromherandthrewinthetrash. Hewantedto
give them a new, more limited pass. C.A.W. argued with him,
explaining that A.C.W. would not understand the change in
procedure when they would have to go to a different line, that he
wouldhaveameltdown.
1840. Taylor was very condescending to C.A.W and said things like “you
knowthedrill”,etc.implyingshewasworkingthesystemtogetthe
bestpass so shewouldn’thave towait in line. She toldhim itwas
only their immediate family, four people in their party, offered to
showhimtheirdriver’slicensestoprovetheywerefamily,andtold
himtheywerenottakingadvantageofanythingimproperly.
1841. Taylor finally gave C.A.W. a Green Light Pass, but told her things
were going to be changing andA.C.W.wouldnot be able to get the
pass in the future, and the family would have to work with
FastPassesinstead.
1842. C.A.W.leftGuestRelationsupset,andcrying. Taylorscaredheroff,
andthefamilyhasnotbeenbacktotheParkssincethisvisit.
1843. C.A.W. has researched the DAS and determined that it does not
render the Parks accessible for A.C.W. The family cannot subject
A.C.W. to the high probability of meltdowns in the Disney Parks.
C.A.W. cannot takeA.C.W. to a place thatwill be detrimental to his
healthandwellbeing.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 275 of 334 Page ID #:894
Page276
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1844. C.A.W.remainsconcernedthatvisitingDisneyParkswithA.C.W.will
be a waste of her monetary resources, and an overall destructive
experienceforA.C.W.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff A.C.W., through C.A.W. as his Next Friend,
ParentandNaturalGuardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of A.C.W.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 276 of 334 Page ID #:895
Page277
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT184
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
L.T.T.v.Disney
1845. PlaintiffL.T.T.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1846. L.T.T.hasautism,anddoesnothavecontrolofhisbody.
1847. Because of his cognitive disabilities, L.T.T. is incapable of
understanding the concept of waiting; and becomes particularly
upsetwhenforcedtoidlywaitforextendedperiodsoftime.
1848. Before the DAS was implemented, L.T.T. loved to ride the Alice in
Wonderlandriderepeatedly,somethinghecannotdowiththeDAS.
Additionally, due to his autism, L.T.T. must follow a pre‐planned
schedule.Hemust ride theDisneyland rides listedonhis schedule;
otherwise,hebecomeshighlyfrustrated.
1849. L.T.T. expresses his frustrations through behavioral meltdowns;
which consist of flailing his head around, spinning, bumping into
things, and pushing his family members. During a meltdown, he
cannotrespondtoverbalcommands,includinghisownname.
1850. L.T.T.isapersonwithadisability,pursuanttothatterm’sdefinition
in42U.S.C.§12102(1).
1851. L.T.T. is nineyearsof age and in the careof hismother, L.J.T.,who
brings this action as L.T.T.'s next friend, parent, and natural
guardian,andhisfather,K.K.T.
1852. L.T.T.,L.J.T.,andK.K.T.areresidentsofVenturaCounty,California.
1853. L.T.T.hasbeengoingtoDisneylandregularlywithhisparentssince
hewas three years of age. At that early age, L.J.T. knew awoman
who had an autistic child, who told L.J.T. about Disney’s Guest
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 277 of 334 Page ID #:896
Page278
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Assistance Card (GAC) program, which L.J.T. thought sounded
wonderful.
1854. When the GAC programwas in place, L.T.T.was always beautifully
accommodated. During those visits, L.T.T. exhibited a nature and
extent of joy that he rarely manifests in any other setting. L.J.T.
delighted in the opportunity to bring to her beloved son a level of
happinesswhichhedoesnotexpressanywhereelse.
1855. Once Disneyland implemented the new Disability Access Service,
everythingchangedfortheworseforL.T.T.andhisfamily.TheDAS
forces the autistic guest to appreciate the distinction between
present and future. L.T.T. simply cannot do so. He cannot
understand that the present‐tense rejection is in exchange for
future‐tense acceptance. When faced with these realities, L.T.T. is
verylikelytoexperienceameltdown.
1856. Before their arrival, L.J.T. called Disneyland and asked whether,
undertheDAS,therecanbeanyotheraccommodationsprovidedfor
guests who provide medical documentation. L.J.T. was told that
medical records would not be necessary, and to talk to Guest
Relationsaboutanyaccommodationsforherson.
1857. Despite Disney’s considerable knowledge that persons with
cognitive disabilities are commonly unable to withstand long and
idlewaittimes,Disneyrequirespreciselythosepersonstoendurea
long and idle wait just to start their day. The same was true for
L.T.T.andhisfamily,astheywererequiredtobegintheirdayinline
atGuestRelationsinordertoobtaintheDAScard.
1858. After starting the day in such an unproductive and discriminatory
manner, L.J.T. asked the Disney employee if there were any
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 278 of 334 Page ID #:897
Page279
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
alternatives or any other type of accommodation available for her
son.Shewastoldno;thisisthewaytheDASworks,andthat’sit.
1859. Afterbegging foradditionalwaystomaketheir tripmorebearable,
L.J.T.wasprovidedwiththree“AttractionReadmissionPasses,”and
told to get FastPasses in between kiosk and ride wait times.
Showing even more ignorance of, or refusal to acknowledge, the
challenges which face families like L.J.T.’s, the employee told L.J.T.
thefamilyshouldbidetimeduringwaits,eatingandshopping.
1860. When the family arrived at Splash Mountain and attempted to
acquire FastPasses as directed, they encountered a return time of
five hours later. This “accommodation” was no accommodation at
all.Thedaydidnotimprove.
1861. L.T.T. experienced a number of crying periods, and several
meltdownsduringhismostrecentvisittoDisneyland.Asaresultof
theDAS,DisneylandwentfrombeingL.T.T.’sfavoriteplacetobeing
an absolute nightmare.Watching her son break down as he did, at
Disneyland,hisonehappyplace,washeartbreakingforL.J.T.
1862. Due to Disney’s recent refusal to provide individually tailored
accommodations forthebenefitofguestswithcognitivedisabilities
such as L.T.T., and Disney’s new arbitrary policies which are
enforced regardless of the guest’s specific needs, L.T.T. has been
prevented fromexperiencing the full enjoymentof theParks to the
sameextenthehasenjoyedtheminthepast,andtothesameextent
affordedtopersonswithoutadisability.
1863. After theDASwent intoeffect,L.T.T.no longer receives the typeof
accommodationandattentionheused to receivewhen theyvisited
Disneylandinthepast.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 279 of 334 Page ID #:898
Page280
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1864. Alsodue toDisney’s refusal tomodify itsprocedures to reasonably
accommodate L.T.T.’s needs, L.J.T. has been deterred from the full
use and enjoyment of the Parks’ rides and attractions. As a
consequence, the family’s interest in continuing their visits to the
Disney Parks has been considerably diminished. In fact, they have
not returned to Disneyland at all since their disastrous visit under
DAS.
1865. If Disney had not abandoned its long standing practices of
welcoming and accommodating the special needs of guests with
cognitiveimpairments,L.T.T.andhisparentswouldcontinuetovisit
theParksasoftenastheyhavebeendoingforthepastseveralyears.
1866. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge and
awareness of the needs of persons with cognitive disabilities, and
notwithstanding Disney’s historic eagerness and ability to
accommodateL.T.T.’s special needs,Disneypersonnel have refused
toconductan individualizedassessmentofL.T.T.'scapacity toavail
himself to the DAS policies; and to modify DAS to allow L.T.T. to
enjoythesamebenefitsandprivilegesasnon‐disabledguests.
1867. Disney employees have shownnowillingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeL.T.T.
1868. L.J.T. incurred inmonetarycostsbypurchasing tickets to theparks
forherselfandL.T.T.,inadditiontootherexpensesassociatedtothe
family’s recent regrettable trips toDisneyland, suchasmileageand
food.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.T.T., by and through L.J.T., as L.T.T.'s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 280 of 334 Page ID #:899
Page281
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of L.T.T.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
andproceduresinordertoaffordPlaintiffwithanopportunityto
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhenshevisitstheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination regarding Disney’s remedial measures and
modified policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring
Plaintiff from visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated
discrimination;and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT185
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.T.T.v.Disney
1869. Plaintiff L.T.T. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1846through1868
above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 281 of 334 Page ID #:900
Page282
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1870. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.T.T. suffered actual
meltdowns.
1871. L.T.T.’s meltdowns at Disneyland were proximately caused by
Disney’s negligent, unlawful, reckless, and arbitrary treatment of
L.T.T. during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material
times, Disney knew L.T.T. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if
treatedinsuchamanner.
1872. L.T.T.’s meltdowns and the treatment which proximately caused
L.T.T. to experience them caused him grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.T.T., by and through L.J.T. as L.T.T.’s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
L.T.T.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.T.T.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.T.T. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 282 of 334 Page ID #:901
Page283
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT186
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.T.T.v.Disney
1873. Plaintiff L.T.T. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1846through1868
above.
1874. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.T.T. suffered actual
meltdowns.
1875. L.T.T.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of L.T.T. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
L.T.T. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
manner.
1876. L.T.T.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
L.T.T. to experience them caused him grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.T.T., by and through L.J.T., as L.T.T.’s next
friend,parent,andnaturalguardian,prays that thisCourtadjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponL.T.T.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.T.T.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.T.T. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 283 of 334 Page ID #:902
Page284
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT187
BreachofContract
L.J.T.v.Disney
1877. Plaintiff L.J.T. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1846through1868
above.
1878. L.J.T. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1879. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1880. L.J.T. incurredexpensesassociatedwiththefamily’swastedtripsto
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.J.T. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithL.J.T.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.J.T. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 284 of 334 Page ID #:903
Page285
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT188
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.J.T.v.Disney
1881. Plaintiff L.J.T. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1846through1868
above.
1882. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.J.T.’s beloved son, L.T.T.,
sufferedactualmeltdownswhileinL.J.T.’spresence.
1883. L.T.T.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofL.T.T.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewL.T.T.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
1884. L.J.T. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
L.T.T.’s escalating frustration, and his resulting meltdowns.
Particularly in light of her trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
toward her son, L.J.T. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
1885. L.J.T.’s observation of L.T.T.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused L.T.T. to
experience themeltdowns, caused L.J.T. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.J.T. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
L.J.T.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 285 of 334 Page ID #:904
Page286
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.J.T.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.J.T. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT189
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
L.J.T.v.Disney
1886. Plaintiff L.J.T. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1846through1868
above.
1887. During one or more visits to the Parks, L.J.T.’s beloved son, L.T.T.,
sufferedactualmeltdowns.
1888. L.T.T.’smeltdownsintheParkswereproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful, and reckless treatment of L.T.T. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
L.T.T. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1889. L.J.T. directly observed the stressors leading up to themeltdowns,
L.T.T.’s increasing distress, and his resulting meltdowns.
Particularly in light of her trust and confidence that Disney would
complywithapplicablelawandactinagraciousandcaringmanner
toward her son, L.J.T. could do nothing reasonable to prevent the
meltdowns.
1890. L.J.T.’s witnessing of L.T.T.’s meltdowns and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused L.T.T. to
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 286 of 334 Page ID #:905
Page287
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
experience themeltdowns, caused L.J.T. grave and extrememental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff L.J.T. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponL.J.T.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoL.J.T.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.J.T. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT190
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
L.T.T.v.Disney
1891. L.T.T. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and1846through1868above.
1892. L.T.T. isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1893. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 287 of 334 Page ID #:906
Page288
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1894. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1895. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1896. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1897. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
L.T.T.’saccess toDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairmentsandlife‐threateningmedicalcondition.
1898. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs L.T.T. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 288 of 334 Page ID #:907
Page289
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of L.T.T.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff L.T.T. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 289 of 334 Page ID #:908
Page290
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT191
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
E.R.M.v.Disney
1899. PlaintiffE.R.M.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68and651through654above.
1900. E.R.M. has autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and
oppositionaldefiancedisorder.E.R.M.exhibitssymptoms indicating
a lack of an ability to maintain control; she cannot tolerate idly
waiting, which will cause her tomouth off and storm off in fits of
rage, all in addition to screaming loudly,making high pitch noises,
and hitting herself. E.R.M. suffers two different types of behavioral
meltdowns: (1) yelling and screaming, while being thoroughly
nonresponsive; or (2) becoming completely quiet and inward, not
moving or speaking for as long as 30 minutes. Some of her
meltdownsareforeseeable;mostarenot.
1901. E.R.M. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
1902. E.R.M. is10yearsofageand isgenerally in thecareofhermother,
M.A.M., who brings this action as E.R.M.’s next friend, adoptive
parentandcourt‐appointedguardian.
1903. M.A.M.andE.R.M.areresidentsofOrangeCounty,Florida.
1904. FormanyyearsleadinguptoOctoberof2013,fromthetimeE.R.M.
was a small girl, E.R.M. and M.A.M. visited the Walt Disney World
Parksdozensoftimes.Duringthosevisits,E.R.M.exhibitedanature
andextentofjoythatsherarelyshowedinanyothersetting.M.A.M.
was always proud and joyful of the opportunity to bring to her
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 290 of 334 Page ID #:909
Page291
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
beloved child a level of happiness which she rarely showed
elsewhere.
1905. E.R.M.’scognitiveimpairmentsmanifestthemselvesinacertainway
during her visits to the parks; E.R.M. is a “repeat rider.” This is a
propensity commonamong autistic persons – a variety of theneed
for consistency, order and routine. E.R.M. will experience a
particular ride or attraction, such as Peter Pan’s Flight and
Kilimanjaro Safaris, over and over, for several hours at a time.
Disney personnel are very familiar with the repeat rider type of
guest.
1906. E.R.Misincapableofwaitinglongperiodsoftimetoridearideorto
enteranattraction.Ifinstructedtodoso,shewouldbeginpullingon
theropesinthequeue,screamingloudly“[w]hyarethesepeoplein
frontofme!”rocking,andswayingbackandforth,beforeeventually
experiencingameltdown.
1907. E.R.M. is incapable of understanding the concept of visiting an
attraction in the present only to be told it cannot be experienced
until sometime in the future. As such, the new DAS creates
avoidable stressors for E.R.M., constantly escalating her stimming
patterns towardmeltdowns. Since Disney’s implementation of the
new DAS, E.R.M. has experienced several meltdowns at the Disney
Parks.
1908. M.A.M.grewupwithDisney;her first trip toDisneylandwasat the
ageof two. Her family took annual trips to theWaltDisneyWorld
Resort and eventuallymoved to central Florida in 1988 to be near
theParks. HerfatherworkedatWaltDisneyWorldformanyyears.
M.A.M.firsttookE.R.M.totheWaltDisneyWorldParkswhenE.R.M.
was three months old, and she took J.M.M. when he was three
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 291 of 334 Page ID #:910
Page292
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
monthsold. In2006,whenE.R.M. and J.M.M.wereveryyoung, the
familypurchasedannualpasses.Throughthechildhoodvisitstothe
Parks,E.R.M.andJ.M.M.carriedtheGuestAssistanceCard,andwere
admirably accommodated. During those visits, E.R.M. and J.M.M.
exhibitedanatureandextentof joy that theyrarelyshowed inany
othersetting.M.A.M.wasalwaysproudandjoyfuloftheopportunity
tobringherbelovedchildrenalevelofhappinesswhichtheyrarely
showed elsewhere. Disney employees were always friendly and
outgoing. Everyonewas smiling and having a good time. It a truly
magicalexperience.
1909. Indeed,thesetripstoDisneybecameacornerstoneofM.A.M.,E.R.M.,
and J.M.M.’s lives. Theyvisited theParkswearingmatchingDisney
costumes.Everyonewashappyandexcitedtobegoing.Theynever
spent longer than about five minutes at Guest Relations obtaining
theirGAC.Thedaythenensuedwithrides,attractions,andlaughter.
Even if therewere crowds,E.R.M. and J.M.M.werehappyandwere
notpronetomeltdowns.
1910. ThisdrasticallychangedafterOctober2013whentheDAScameinto
effect.InNovember2013duringtheirfirstvisittotheDisneyParks
under the DAS regime, it was as if the employees had undergone
personality transplants.Theemployeesno longerwentoutof their
way to smile and greet M.A.M., E.R.M., or J.M.M, and the
accommodationsandcourtesieswhichonceuponatimemadetheir
Disney experience so magical had been replaced with scorn and
disdain.
1911. Thisfirstpost‐DASvisitbeganwithanimmediate25‐minutewaitat
GuestRelations.Allofasudden,arrivalattheDisneyParkswasnot
a welcoming experience but a laboring one. An employee gave a
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 292 of 334 Page ID #:911
Page293
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
short explanation to M.A.M. about how the DAS worked which
concluded with a statement that these were the new rules and
nothingcouldbedoneaboutthem.Theemployeethenwishedthem
a“MagicalDay.”Theresultingdaywasanythingbut.
1912. After leavingGuestRelations,M.A.M., E.R.M., and J.M.M.made their
way to “EnchantedTaleswithBelle”where theyencountereda20‐
minutewait.Thiswaitwentfairlysmoothly;atthispointintheday,
M.A.M.wasabletodistractJ.M.M.
1913. However,uponarrivingatthenextride,“UndertheSea~Journeyof
theLittleMermaid,” theyencountereda45‐minutereturn timeand
anemployeewhoforcedM.A.M.’ssister,whohascerebralpalsyand
is confined to a wheelchair, to remove everything from her
wheelchair,almostcausinghertofalloffthesideoftheramp.J.M.M.
sufferedameltdownduringthedebacle.
1914. After this, M.A.M., E.R.M., and J.M.M. left the parks feeling
disenchanted and disillusioned; their entire Disney experience
lackedinthemagicthatoncemadetheirvisitssounforgettable.
1915. UnabletobelievethatthiscouldbethenewDisney,M.A.M.returned
to theDisneyParks inDecember forher sister’sbirthday.This trip
was evenmorehectic andun‐magical than the first, culminating in
E.R.M.sufferingameltdowninoneoftheParks.M.A.M.thenvowed
toneverallowE.R.M. tobesubjected tosuch treatmentagain–not
aslongastheDASisstillinforce.
1916. M.A.M.hasnotrenewedherannualpassessincetheirreturnvisitin
December2013.
1917. Due to its failure to accommodate which leads to an increased
propensity for E.R.M. to experience meltdowns, Defendant has
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 293 of 334 Page ID #:912
Page294
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
preventedE.R.M. fromexperiencing the full enjoymentof itsParks,
equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
1918. After October 9, 2013, E.R.M. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionM.R.M.,E.R.M.andJ.M.M.hadreceived
whentheyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
1919. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate E.R.M.’s needs, M.A.M. and E.R.M. have been
discouraged and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
Parks' rides and attractions. M.A.M. would continue to frequently
visit the Parks with E.R.M. if Disney had not abandoned its past
policyofaccommodatingthespecialneedsofpersonswithcognitive
impairments. The family’s interest in attending the Parks is
substantially reduced. M.A.M. knows they should avoid attending
theParks in the futurebecausedoing sowillonly lead to the same
un‐magicalandun‐accommodatingdiscrimination.
1920. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate E.R.M.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessment of E.R.M.’s capacity to utilize the DAS, and have failed
and refused to modify the DAS to allow E.R.M. to enjoy the same
benefitsandprivilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1921. Disney personnel have shown no willingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeE.R.M.
1922. M.A.M. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 294 of 334 Page ID #:913
Page295
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff E.R.M., by and through M.A.M. as his next
friend, parent and court‐appointed guardian, prays that this Court
adjudicatethisdisputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of E.R.M.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 295 of 334 Page ID #:914
Page296
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT192
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
E.R.M.v.Disney
1923. Plaintiff E.R.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1900through1922
above.
1924. During one or more visits to the Parks, E.R.M. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1925. The symptoms and conditions associated with E.R.M.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1926. E.R.M.’smeltdownin theParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of E.R.M.
during her patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewE.R.M.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
1927. E.R.M.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
E.R.M. to experience the meltdown caused her grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffE.R.M.,byandthroughM.A.M.asE.R.M.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
E.R.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoE.R.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff E.R.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 296 of 334 Page ID #:915
Page297
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT193
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
E.R.M.v.Disney
1928. Plaintiff E.R.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1900through1922
above.
1929. During one or more visits to the Parks, E.R.M. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1930. The symptoms and conditions associated with E.R.M.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1931. E.R.M.’smeltdownin theParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of E.R.M. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
E.R.M. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1932. E.R.M.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
E.R.M. to experience the meltdown caused her grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffE.R.M.,byandthroughM.A.M.asE.R.M.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponE.R.M.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 297 of 334 Page ID #:916
Page298
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoE.R.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff E.R.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT194
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
J.M.M.v.Disney
1933. PlaintiffJ.M.M.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1934. J.M.M.hasautismandattentiondeficithyperactivitydisorder.J.M.M.
alsosuffersfromahearingdeficit.J.M.M.’ssymptomsandstemming
patternsincludefidgetingwhenheisstandingaroundandtouching
hisprivateareas.Behaviormeltdowns for J.M.M.arebestdescribed
as violent and loud. J.M.M. goes from one extreme to the other,
becoming very verbal, screaming “No! No! No!” striking his sister
E.R.M., before eventually stomping and running off (elopement).
Onceexperiencingameltdown,itcantakeJ.M.M.upto60minutesto
recoverfully.
1935. J.M.M. is a person with a disability, as that term is defined in 42
U.S.C.§12102(1).
1936. J.M.M.isnineyearsofageandisgenerallyinthecareofhismother,
M.A.M., who brings this action as J.M.M.’s next friend, adoptive
parentandcourt‐appointedguardian.
1937. M.A.M.andJ.M.M.areresidentsofOrangeCounty,Florida.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 298 of 334 Page ID #:917
Page299
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1938. FormanyyearsleadinguptoOctoberof2013,fromthetimeJ.M.M.
was a small boy, J.M.M. and M.A.M. visited theWalt Disney World
Parksdozensoftimes.Duringthosevisits,J.M.M.exhibitedanature
andextentofjoythatherarelyshowedinanyothersetting.M.A.M.
was always proud and joyful of the opportunity to bring to her
belovedsonalevelofhappinesswhichherarelyshowedelsewhere.
1939. J.M.M.’scognitiveimpairmentsmanifestthemselvesinacertainway
during his visits to the parks; J.M.M. is incapable of deviating from
consistency,orderandroutine.J.M.M.enterstheParkswithalistof
rideshemustride,andinthatorder.Additionally,therearenuances
of his trip which if non‐existent, would lead to a meltdown. For
example, J.M.M.musthavepopcornduringeveryvisit to theDisney
Parks.AtEpcot,hemustrideTestTrack.AtMagicKingdom,hemust
ridePiratesoftheCaribbean.Todisrupttheseroutinesistotrigger
anuncontrolledresponse.
1940. Similarly,J.M.M.isincapableofwaiting45minutesorlongertoride
arideortoenteranattraction.Ifaskedtodoso,hewouldinstantly
becomeangry,andlikelyexperienceameltdown.
1941. J.M.M.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitingarideor
attractiononlytobeprohibitedfromridingituntilafuturetime.As
such, the new DAS creates avoidable stressors for J.M.M., violently
escalatinghisstimmingpatternstowardmeltdowns. SinceDisney’s
implementation of the new DAS, J.M.M. has experienced several
meltdownsattheDisneyParks.
1942. M.A.M.grewupwithDisney;her first trip toDisneylandwasatage
two. Her family tookannual trips to theWaltDisneyWorldResort
and eventually moved to central Florida in 1988 to be near the
Parks. Her father worked at Walt Disney World for many years.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 299 of 334 Page ID #:918
Page300
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
M.A.M.firsttookE.R.M.totheWaltDisneyWorldParkswhenE.R.M.
was three months old, and she took J.M.M. when he was three
monthsold. In2006,whenE.R.M. and J.M.M.wereveryyoung, the
familypurchasedannualpasses.Throughthechildhoodvisitstothe
Parks,E.R.M.andJ.M.M.carriedtheGuestAssistanceCard,andwere
admirably accommodated. During those visits, E.R.M. and J.M.M.
exhibitedanatureandextentof joy that theyrarelyshowed inany
othersetting.M.A.M.wasalwaysproudandjoyfuloftheopportunity
tobringherbelovedchildrenalevelofhappinesswhichtheyrarely
showed elsewhere. Disney employees were always friendly and
outgoing. Everyonewas smiling and having a good time. It a truly
magicalexperience.
1943. Indeed,thesetripstoDisneybecameacornerstoneofM.A.M.,E.R.M.,
and J.M.M.’s lives. Theyvisited theParkswearingmatchingDisney
costumes.Everyonewashappyandexcitedtobegoing.Theynever
spent longer than five minutes at Guest Relations obtaining their
GAC.Thedaythenensuedwithrides,attractions,andlaughter.Even
if there were crowds, E.R.M. and J.M.M. were happy and were not
pronetomeltdowns.
1944. ThisdrasticallychangedafterOctober2013whentheDAScameinto
effect.InNovember2013duringtheirfirstvisittotheDisneyParks
under the DAS regime, it was as if the employees had undergone
personality transplants.Theemployeesno longerwentoutof their
way to smile and greet M.A.M., E.R.M., or J.M.M, and the
accommodationsandcourtesieswhichonceuponatimemadetheir
Disney experience so magical had been replaced with scorn and
disdain.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 300 of 334 Page ID #:919
Page301
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1945. Thisfirstpost‐DASvisitbeganwithanimmediate25‐minutewaitat
GuestRelations.Allofasudden,arrivalattheDisneyParkswasnot
a welcoming experience but a laboring one. An employee gave a
short explanation to M.A.M. about how the DAS worked which
concluded with a statement that these were the new rules and
nothingcouldbedoneaboutthem.Theemployeethenwishedthem
a“MagicalDay.”Theresultingdaywasanythingbut.
1946. After leavingGuestRelations,M.A.M., E.R.M., and J.M.M.made their
way to “EnchantedTaleswithBelle”where theyencountereda20‐
minutewait.Thiswaitwentfairlysmoothly;atthispointM.A.M.was
abletodistractJ.M.M.
1947. However,uponarrivingatthenextride,“UndertheSea~Journeyof
theLittleMermaid,” theyencountereda45‐minutereturn timeand
anemployeewhoforcedM.A.M.’ssister,whohascerebralpalsyand
is confined to a wheelchair, to remove everything from her
wheelchair,almostcausinghertofalloffthesideoftheramp.J.M.M.
sufferedameltdownduringthedebacle.
1948. After this, M.A.M., E.R.M., and J.M.M. left the parks feeling
disenchanted and disillusioned; their entire Disney experience
lackedinthemagicthatoncemadetheirvisitssounforgettable.
1949. UnabletobelievethatthiscouldbethenewDisney,M.A.M.returned
to theDisneyParks inDecember forher sister’sbirthday.This trip
was evenmorehectic andun‐magical than the first, culminating in
E.R.M.sufferingameltdowninoneoftheParks.M.A.M.thenvowed
to never allow E.R.M. and J.M.M. to be subjected to such treatment
again–notaslongastheDASisstillinforce.
1950. M.A.M.hasnotrenewedherannualpassessincetheirreturnvisitin
December2013.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 301 of 334 Page ID #:920
Page302
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1951. Due to its failure to accommodate which leads to an increased
propensity for J.M.M. to experience meltdowns, Defendant has
prevented J.M.M. fromexperiencing the full enjoyment of its Parks,
equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
1952. After October 9, 2013, J.M.M. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionM.R.M.,E.R.M.andJ.M.M.hadreceived
whentheyvisitedtheParksinthepast.
1953. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate J.M.M.’s needs, M.A.M., E.R.M. and J.M.M. have been
discouraged and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the
Parks' rides and attractions. M.A.M. would continue to frequently
visittheParkswithJ.M.M.hadDisneynotabandoneditspastpolicy
of accommodating the special needs of persons with cognitive
impairments. The family’s interest in attending the Parks is
substantially reduced. M.A.M. knows they should avoid attending
theParks in the futurebecausedoing sowillonly lead to the same
un‐magicalandun‐accommodatingdiscrimination.
1954. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate J.M.M.’s special needs,
Disney personnel have refused to conduct an individualized
assessment of J.M.M.’s capacity to utilize the DAS, and have failed
and refused to modify the DAS to allow J.M.M. to enjoy the same
benefitsandprivilegesasnon‐disabledpatrons.
1955. Disney personnel have shown no willingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeJ.M.M.
1956. M.A.M. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 302 of 334 Page ID #:921
Page303
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff J.M.M., by and through M.A.M. as his next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of J.M.M.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 303 of 334 Page ID #:922
Page304
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT195
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.M.M.v.Disney
1957. Plaintiff J.M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1934through1956
above.
1958. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.M.M. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1959. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.M.M.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1960. J.M.M.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment of J.M.M.
during his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times,
DisneyknewJ.M.M.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedin
suchamannerbyanyone.
1961. J.M.M.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
J.M.M. to experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.M.M.,byandthroughM.A.M.asJ.M.M.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
J.M.M.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.M.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.M.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 304 of 334 Page ID #:923
Page305
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT196
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
J.M.M.v.Disney
1962. Plaintiff J.M.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1934through1956
above.
1963. During one or more visits to the Parks, J.M.M. suffered an actual
meltdown.
1964. The symptoms and conditions associated with J.M.M.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderFloridalaw.
1965. J.M.M.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximatelycausedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of J.M.M. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
J.M.M. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
1966. J.M.M.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
J.M.M. to experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffJ.M.M.,byandthroughM.A.M.asJ.M.M.’snext
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponJ.M.M.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 305 of 334 Page ID #:924
Page306
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoJ.M.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff J.M.M. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT197
BreachofContract
M.A.M.v.Disney
1967. Plaintiff M.A.M. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,1900through1922,and
1934through1956above.
1968. M.A.M. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
1969. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
1970. M.A.M. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips
totheParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff M.A.M. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithM.A.M.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff M.A.M. in the amount of her
economicmonetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 306 of 334 Page ID #:925
Page307
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT198
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
T.A.L.v.Disney
1971. PlaintiffT.A.L.incorporatesandre‐allegesparagraphs1through66,
68,and651through654above.
1972. T.A.L.hasautism.He is largelynon‐verbalandsuffers fromapraxia
of speech.T.A.L.’s symptomsand stimmingpatterns include talking
loudlytohimself,theinabilitytositorstandstill,andbumpinginto
familymembers.BehaviormeltdownsforT.A.L.consistgenerallyof
aggressive, self‐injurious reactions, including biting his hand and
crying loudly.T.A.L. can cause anxiety inothers in the surrounding
area, in that he even at 13 years of age, T.A.L.was six feet tall and
weighedover175pounds.
1973. T.A.L.isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
1974. T.A.L.is14yearsoldandisgenerallyinthecareofhermother,G.L.,
who brings this action as T.A.L.'s next friend, parent and natural
guardian.
1975. T.A.L.andG.L.areresidentsofDenverCounty,Colorado.
1976. G.L.grewupaDisneylover,visitingtheDisneyParksoftenwithher
mother, father, and brother. For three years, G.L. worked at
Disneyland, becoming familiarwithwhatwas once the culture and
philosophy of Disney toward all its guests, including those with
disabilities.
1977. G.L. first took T.A.L. to Disneylandwhen T.A.L.was nine years old.
From that time forward, G.L. frequently took T.A.L. to the Disney
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 307 of 334 Page ID #:926
Page308
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Parks,andoftenfortwotothreedaysatatime.Duringthosevisits,
T.A.L.exhibitedanatureandextentof joy thatherarelyshowed in
any other setting. G.L. was always proud and joyful of the
opportunitytobringtoherbelovedchildalevelofhappinesswhich
he rarely showed elsewhere. T.A.L. specifically requested to go to
Disneyland as often as G.L. could take him. For five consecutive
years, G.L. purchased premium passes for her family. Their
DisneylandtripswerealwaysaseminaleventinT.A.L.’slife.ForG.L.
andT.A.L.,Disneytrulywasthehappiestplaceonearth.
1978. G.L.andT.A.L.relocatedfromCaliforniatoDenver,Colorado,inJuly
of 2013, and the frequency of their trips to the Disney Parks,
unfortunately,wasreduced.
1979. Since T.A.L. was a toddler, his cognitive impairments have
manifestedthemselves inacertainwayduringthe family’svisits to
theParks. T.A.L.must experience the park in a specific order, and
disruptions to this routine will tend to escalate his stimming
behaviorstowardmeltdowns.T.A.L.hasastrictscheduleinhishead
of theDisneyland attractions hemust visit, and the order inwhich
he must ride them, including where he wants to have lunch. For
T.A.L.,anytriptoDisneylandmuststartatSpaceMountain.
1980. Similarly,ifT.A.L.wererequiredtoidlywaitforentryintoarideor
attraction for more than a few minutes, he also would likely melt
down. During the wait, he would begin bumping into family
members around him, biting himself, and screaming loudly before
experiencingameltdown.Uponmeltdown,hismotherknows todo
whatever she can toprevent thebehavior fromescalating, perhaps
to pushing or bumping into others, which can create an
uncomfortablesituationforhismotherandthosearoundhim.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 308 of 334 Page ID #:927
Page309
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1981. BecauseT.A.L.isincapableofunderstandingtheconceptofvisitinga
rideorattractiononly tobeprohibited fromriding ituntila future
time, the newDAS creates avoidable stressors forT.A.L., escalating
his stimming patterns toward meltdowns. Since Disney’s
implementation of the new DAS, T.A.L. has experienced several
meltdownsatDisneyland.
1982. DuetoDisney’sfailuretoaccommodateT.A.L.sindividualizedneeds,
which prior to the DAS Disney had always been able to admirably
accomplish, T.A.L. is now prone to experiencing meltdowns at
Disneyland. He is thus prevented from experiencing the full
enjoymentoftheParks,equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithout
adisability.
1983. G.L. and T.A.L.’s first visit to Disneyland under the new Disney
policies was during December of 2013. They had relocated to
Colorado and returned for a Disneyland trip prior to expiration of
their premium passes. G.L. waited for 30minutes in line at Guest
Relations while T.A.L. sat on a bench close by, as they had done
everytimeinthepast.Uponreachingthefrontoftheline,however,
their trip took a sudden turn for the worse as the employee
explained that the GAC was no longer available and had been
replacedbytheDAS.TheemployeeaskedG.L.:“Areyouawareofour
newpolicy?”
1984. As the Disney employee then explained how the DAS worked, G.L.
listened intently but disbelievingly. She immediately said this new
arrangementwillnotworkforT.A.L.;itsimplywillnotaccommodate
him. She was only told that there is nothing more that could be
done:“Thisisournewpolicy.”
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 309 of 334 Page ID #:928
Page310
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1985. That day, most of the Disney employees were unfamiliar with the
DASandwereun‐accommodating.ManyDisneyemployeesgaveG.L.
thegeneral impressionthatDisneydoubtedwhetherT.A.L. isreally
disabled.
1986. Thenextday,Disneywaseven lesswarmand lessaccommodating.
The day got progressivelyworse until, ultimately, T.A.L. suffered a
meltdownwhile tryingtoenteraride.Therideoperator toldT.A.L.
he couldnot enter the ride at that time, and the situation causeda
meltdownforT.A.L.G.L.andT.A.L.lefttheDisneyParks,forthefirst
time feeling that Disneyland was no longer the happiest place on
earth.
1987. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodate T.A.L.’s needs, T.A.L. and G.L. have been discouraged
and deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the Disneyland
rides and attractions. G.L. would visit the Parks with T.A.L. again
had Disney not abandoned its past policy of accommodating the
special needs of persons with cognitive impairments. G.L. knows
theywillavoidattending theparks in the futurebecauseT.A.L.will
suffer disparate and discriminatory treatment as a result of his
disability. Undoubtedly, the experience will be an un‐magical and
un‐accommodatingone.
1988. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’s historic ability to accommodate T.A.L.’s special needs,
Disneypersonnelrefusedtoconductanindividualizedassessmentof
T.A.L.'s capacity to utilize the DAS, and did not modify the DAS to
allow T.A.L. to enjoy the same benefits and privileges as Disney’s
non‐disabledpatrons.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 310 of 334 Page ID #:929
Page311
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
1989. Disney personnel have shown no willingness or desire to improve
theexperienceforguestslikeT.A.L.
1990. G.L. incurred expenses associated with the family’s wasted trip to
theParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffT.A.L.byandthroughG.L.,asT.A.L.'snextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiff on account of T.A.L.’s disability;
and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 311 of 334 Page ID #:930
Page312
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Count199
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
T.A.L.v.Disney
1991. T.A.L. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,1972through1990above.
1992. T.A.L. isandatallmaterialtimeshasbeenadisabledpersonwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
1993. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
1994. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
1995. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
1996. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
1997. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
T.A.L.’saccess toDisney’sprograms,servicesandactivities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 312 of 334 Page ID #:931
Page313
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
1998. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusimmediatereliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs T.A.L. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of T.A.L.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 313 of 334 Page ID #:932
Page314
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.A.L. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT200
BreachofContract
G.L.v.Disney
1999. Plaintiff G.L. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1972through1990
above.
2000. G.L. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
2001. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
2002. G.L. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips to
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffG.L.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithG.L..;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 314 of 334 Page ID #:933
Page315
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
EnteringjudgmentforPlaintiffG.L.intheamountofhereconomic
monetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT201
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.A.L.v.Disney
2003. Plaintiff T.A.L. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1972through1990
above.
2004. During one or more visits to the Parks, T.A.L. suffered an actual
meltdown.
2005. The symptoms and conditions associated with T.A.L.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
2006. T.A.L.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofT.A.L.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewT.A.L.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
2007. T.A.L.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
T.A.L. to experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.A.L., by and through G.L. as T.A.L.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 315 of 334 Page ID #:934
Page316
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
T.A.L.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.A.L.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.A.L. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT202
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
T.A.L.v.Disney
2008. Plaintiff T.A.L. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1972through1990
above.
2009. During one or more visits to the Parks, T.A.L. suffered an actual
meltdown.
2010. The symptoms and conditions associated with T.A.L.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
2011. T.A.L.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of T.A.L. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
T.A.L. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
2012. T.A.L.’s meltdown and the treatment which proximately caused
T.A.L. to experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme
mental anguish and emotional trauma, forwhich Disney should be
heldaccountable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 316 of 334 Page ID #:935
Page317
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff T.A.L., by and through G.L. as T.A.L.’s next
friend, parent andnatural guardian, prays that thisCourt adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponT.A.L.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoT.A.L.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff T.A.L. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT203
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
G.L.v.Disney
2013. Plaintiff G.L. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and1972through1990
above.
2014. During one or more visits to the Parks, G.L.’s beloved son T.A.L.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinG.L.’spresence.
2015. The symptoms and conditions associated with T.A.L.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoT.A.L.underCalifornialaw.
2016. T.A.L.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
negligent,unlawful,recklessandarbitrarytreatmentofT.A.L.during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 317 of 334 Page ID #:936
Page318
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
knewT.A.L.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsucha
mannerbyanyone.
2017. G.L. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
T.A.L.’s resulting escalation andhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,G.L.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
2018. G.L.’s observation of T.A.L.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused T.A.L. to
experience the meltdown caused G.L. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff G.L. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
G.L.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoG.L.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff G.L. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 318 of 334 Page ID #:937
Page319
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT204
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
G.L.v.Disney
2019. Plaintiff G.L. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and1972through1990
above..
2020. During one or more visits to the Parks, G.L.’s beloved son T.A.L.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
2021. The symptoms and conditions associated with T.A.L.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
2022. T.A.L.’smeltdown in theParkswasproximately causedbyDisney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of T.A.L. during his
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
T.A.L. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
2023. G.L. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
T.A.L.’s resulting escalation andhismeltdown. Particularly in light
of her trust and confidence that Disney would comply with
applicable lawandact inagraciousandcaringmanner towardher
son,G.L.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
2024. G.L.’s observation of T.A.L.’s meltdown and of the outrageous
conduct and treatment which proximately caused T.A.L. to
experience the meltdown caused G.L. grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff G.L. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 319 of 334 Page ID #:938
Page320
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponG.L.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoG.L.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff G.L. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT205
ViolationoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesAct
42U.S.C.§§12131,etseq.
D.F.v.Disney
2025. Plaintiff incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 66, 68,
and651through654above.
2026. D.F.hasautism.Healsosuffersfromobsessivecompulsivedisorder,
separation anxiety, and bipolar disorder. D.F. becomes overtly
anxiouswhenhisroutineorscheduleisaltered,orwhenheisforced
to idly wait formore than a fewminutes. Behaviormeltdowns for
D.F. consist generally of grabbing, grunting, groaning, twisting and
pullinghishairout,chewingonarag,andyellingprofanities.
2027. D.F. isapersonwithadisability,asthattermisdefinedin42U.S.C.
§12102(1).
2028. D.F. is 27 years old and is generally in the care of hismother, C.F.
who brings this action as D.F.'s next friend, parent, and natural
guardian.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 320 of 334 Page ID #:939
Page321
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
2029. D.F.andC.F.areresidentsofSanBernardinoCounty,California.
2030. C.F.grewupaDisneyloverandinstilledthatsameloveofDisneyin
her son. C.F. first tookD.F. toDisneylandwhenhewas three years
old,andhasbeenbackeveryyearsincethen,atleastthreetimesper
year, including an annual birthday trip which D.F. requests every
year.
2031. Disneylandwas a blessing forD.F. Itwas the onlyplacewhere C.F.
andD.F.couldexperiencereleasefromthedisabilitythatotherwise
followedC.F. andD.F. on a daily basis. Under theGAC,Disneyland
evenedtheplayingfield.
2032. ForC.F. andD.F., a typical visit toDisneylandduring thepriorGAC
wasanaccommodatingexperience.UponarrivalattheDisneyParks,
C.F.obtainedaGACfromGuestRelationswithinfiveminutes.During
this interaction,DisneyemployeescourteouslygreetedC.F.andD.F.
withasmilebeforeexaminingD.F.’soldGACcardandthenstamping
anewGACcard.TheyspenttherestofthedayridingtheridesD.F.
wished to ride, in the order he needed to ride them on that
particular day. Typically, their visits started with Snow White’s
Scary Adventures, followed by Space Mountain, and finally Buzz
LightyearAstro Blasters, beforeD.F.was comfortable venturing off
withC.F.toexploreotherareasofthePark.
2033. SinceD.F.wasatoddler,hiscognitiveimpairmentshavemanifested
themselves in a certainway during the family’s visits to the Parks.
D.F.mustexperiencetheparkinaspecificorder,anddisruptionsin
his necessary routine will tend to escalate his stimming behaviors
towardmeltdowns.
2034. IfD.F.were required to idlywait for entry intoa rideor attraction
formorethanabouttenminutes,hewouldlikelymeltdown.During
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 321 of 334 Page ID #:940
Page322
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
thewait,hispassivebehaviors–usuallyrepeatingdaysoftheweek
orcalendar,forexample“HowmanyweeksuntilMay”–willescalate
into more aggressive behavior, including grasping, grunting, and
groaning.Inbetweenthepassiveandaggressivestages,D.F.’spupils
becomedilated, his lipswill purse, and hewill begin chomping his
jaws. If D.F. is not removed from the condition, a meltdown will
occur.
2035. Similarly, if D.F. were required to experience the park in an
unanticipatedsequencehewouldlikelymeltdown.Atpresentheis
compelled to experience Star Tours, Space Mountain, and Buzz
Lightyear before riding any other ride. D.F. does not need to
experiencethesefirstthreeridesinaparticularorder,solongashe
experiencesthesethreeridesbeforeanyotherride.
2036. BecauseD.F. is incapableofunderstanding theconceptofvisitinga
rideorattractiononly tobeprohibited fromriding ituntila future
time,thenewDAScreatesavoidablestressorsforD.F.,escalatinghis
stimming patterns toward meltdowns. Since Disney’s
implementation of the new DAS, D.F. has experienced several
meltdowns at Disneyland due to the varied stressors which are
imposed upon him by the DAS, including extended idlewait times,
directivestoentertheridesfromdifferentlocations,anddisruption
ofpatternsandroutines.
2037. DuetoDisney’sfailuretoaccommodate,whichleadstoanincreased
propensity for D.F. to experience a meltdown, Defendant has
prevented D.F. from experiencing the full enjoyment of its Parks,
equaltotheexperiencesofpersonswithoutadisability.
2038. C.F. and D.F.’s first visit to Disneyland under the DAS occurred
October 25, 2013. After a 45‐minute wait at Guest Relations, C.F.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 322 of 334 Page ID #:941
Page323
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
and D.F. were instructed by a Disney employee that the DAS was
Disney’s new accessibility system. Following C.F.’s objections, the
employee advised C.F. to figure out how to get over her anger and
learn the new DAS, because there would be no exceptions, and no
changes.Thatday,asaone‐time‐onlyaccommodation,theemployee
gave C.F. courtesy passes to the three rides D.F. most enjoyed.
Shocked by the employee’s “advice,” C.F. and D.F. began their
supremely unaccommodating day with a visit to Star Tours with
theircourtesypass.
2039. Next,C.F.andD.F.visitedSpaceMountain,where their luckquickly
ran out upon encountering a disability line stretching hundreds of
yards.
2040. They obtained prompt access to Buzz Lightyear after showing the
courtesypass.
2041. C.F.andD.F. left theParksdisappointedby theirunfulfillingDisney
experiencewhichlackedtheaccommodationandmagicC.F.andD.F.
had always experienced before the DAS. To make matters worse,
they encountered a new Disney attitude of neutral indifference at
Guest Relations, along with complete arbitrariness in every other
areaofthePark.
2042. After October 9, 2013, D.F. no longer received the type of
accommodationandattentionD.F. andC.F.had receivedwhen they
visitedtheParksinthepast.
2043. Unlikemostpersonsdiagnosedwithautism,D.F.iscapableoffeeling
embarrassment. D.F. has grown physically angry many times as a
result of the treatment he received by Disney because of being
singledoutonaccountofhisdisability.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 323 of 334 Page ID #:942
Page324
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
2044. AsaresultofDisney’srefusaltomodifyitsprocedurestoreasonably
accommodateD.F.’sneeds,D.F. andC.F.havebeendiscouragedand
deterred from the full use and enjoyment of the park's rides and
attractions.C.F.wouldvisittheParkswithD.F.moreoftenifDisney
had not abandoned its past policy of accommodating the special
needsofpersonswithcognitiveimpairments. C.F.wouldhavebeen
eager to renew her deluxe annual passes; she has been an annual
passholder since 1999. However, their interest in attending the
Parks issubstantiallyreduced. Accordingly,whensherenewedher
pass in 2014, she downgraded from deluxe annual passes to the
“SOCAL” annualpasses. C.F. knows they should avoid attending the
parks in the futuredue to the reasonable expectation thatD.F.will
besubjectedtodiscrimination,andthattheexperiencewillagainbe
anun‐magicalandun‐accommodatingone.
2045. Notwithstanding Disney’s highly sophisticated knowledge of the
needs of personswith cognitive impairments, and notwithstanding
Disney’shistoricabilitytoaccommodateD.F.’sspecialneeds,Disney
personnel have refused to conduct an individualized assessmentof
D.F.'scapacitytoutilizetheDAS,andhaverefusedtomodifytheDAS
to allow D.F. to enjoy the same benefits and privileges as non‐
disabledpatrons.
2046. Disneypersonnelhaveshownnoopenness,willingnessordesire to
improvetheexperienceforguestslikeD.F.
2047. C.F.incurredexpensesassociatedwithwastedtripstotheParks.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffD.F.byandthroughC.F.,asD.F.'snextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 324 of 334 Page ID #:943
Page325
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
• Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discriminationagainstPlaintiffonaccountofD.F.’sdisability;and
• EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiff with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
• EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffwhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
• Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, to prevent Disney from further deterring Plaintiff from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
• EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
• Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
• SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT206
ViolationoftheUnruhCivilRightsAct
CaliforniaCivilCode§§51,52
D.F.v.Disney
2048. D.F. incorporates and re‐alleges paragraphs 1 through 68, 651
through654,and2026through2047above.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 325 of 334 Page ID #:944
Page326
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
2049. D.F. is and at allmaterial times has been a disabled personwithin
themeaningofCaliforniaGovernmentCode12926(j).
2050. Section 51 of the California Civil Code, the Unruh Civil Rights Act,
provides protection from discrimination by all business
establishments in California, including housing and public
accommodations,becauseofage,ancestry,color,disability,national
origin,race,religion,sexandsexualorientation.
2051. Section52oftheCaliforniaCivilCodeprovidesthatwhoeverdenies,
aids or incites a denial, ormakes any discrimination or distinction
contrarytoSection51isliableforeachandeveryoffense.
2052. PursuanttoCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51(f),aviolationoftheADA
alsoconstitutesaviolationofCaliforniaCivilCodeSection51,etseq.
2053. TheParks are “business establishments”within themeaningof the
CaliforniaCodeSection51,etseq.
2054. ThroughtheactsandomissionsdescribedinthisComplaint,Disney
has violated California Civil Code Section 51 by denying Plaintiff
D.F.’s access to Disney’s programs, services and activities. Disney
has institutedandcontinuestoutilizepolicieswhichdenyorwhich
aid or incite the denial of Plaintiff’s full and equal enjoyment of
Disney’s public accommodations in the same manner as non‐
disabled persons. Disney refuses to modify its policies and
procedurestopermitfairenjoymentofitsfacilitiesbyPlaintiff.Asa
direct and proximate result of the afore‐mentioned acts and
omissions, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, hardship,
humiliation and anxiety due to Disney’s failure to provide
reasonableaccommodationsandaccessasarerequiredbyPlaintiff’s
cognitiveimpairments.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 326 of 334 Page ID #:945
Page327
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
2055. Due to the continuous nature of Disney’s ongoing discriminatory
conduct, declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate.
Moreover, as a result of Defendant’s action, Plaintiff is suffering
irreparableharm,andthusexpeditiousreliefisappropriate.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs D.F. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Enjoining Defendant to cease the practices which are causing
discrimination against Plaintiffs on account of D.F.’s disability;
and
EnjoiningDefendant to reasonablymodify its policies, practices,
and procedures to afford Plaintiffs with an opportunity to
experience Disney’s goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages,andaccommodations;and
EstablishingCourt‐approvedremedialmeasuresthatDisneymust
implement,topreventDisneyfromfurtherdiscriminatingagainst
PlaintiffswhentheyvisittheDisneyParks;and
Establishing Court‐approved requirements for information
dissemination about Disney’s remedial measures and modified
policies, topreventDisney fromfurtherdeterringPlaintiffs from
visiting Disney Parks as a result of anticipated discrimination;
and
EstablishingamonitoringprogramtoensureDisney’scompliance
withtheCourt’sOrders;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.F. in the amount of his non‐
economicmonetarydamages;and
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 327 of 334 Page ID #:946
Page328
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonableattorney’sfeesasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffsandagainstDisney;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT207
BreachofContract
C.F.v.Disney
2056. Plaintiff C.F. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and2026through2047
above.
2057. C.F. entered into a contract through which Disney promised to
provide a reasonable and enjoyable amusement park experience,
andonewhichcomplieswithapplicablelaw.
2058. Disney failedorrefused toprovide thepromisedexperience,and is
inbreachofcontract.
2059. C.F. incurred expenses associatedwith the family’swasted trips to
theParks.PlaintiffisdamagedbyDisney’sbreachofcontract.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffC.F.praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
FindingthatDisneybreacheditscontractwithC.F..;and
EnteringjudgmentforPlaintiffC.F.intheamountofhereconomic
monetarydamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 328 of 334 Page ID #:947
Page329
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
COUNT208
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.F.v.Disney
2060. Plaintiff D.F. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and2026through2047
above.
2061. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.F. suffered an actual
meltdown.
2062. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.F.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
2063. D.F.’s meltdown in the Parks was proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment ofD.F. during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewD.F. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
2064. D.F.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedD.F.to
experience the meltdown caused her grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffD.F.,byandthroughC.F.asD.F.’snextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
D.F.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.F.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.F. in the amount of such
damages;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 329 of 334 Page ID #:948
Page330
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT209
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
D.F.v.Disney
2065. Plaintiff D.F. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and2026through2047
above.
2066. During one or more visits to the Parks, D.F. suffered an actual
meltdown.
2067. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.F.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
2068. D.F.’s meltdown in the Parks was proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of D.F. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
D.F.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
2069. D.F.’smeltdownandthetreatmentwhichproximatelycausedD.F.to
experience the meltdown caused him grave and extreme mental
anguish and emotional trauma, for which Disney should be held
accountable.
WHEREFORE,PlaintiffD.F.,byandthroughC.F.asD.F.’snextfriend,
parentandnaturalguardian,praysthatthisCourtadjudicatethisdispute
andenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponD.F.;and
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 330 of 334 Page ID #:949
Page331
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoD.F.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff D.F. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT210
NegligentInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.F.v.Disney
2070. Plaintiff C.F. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through66,651through654,and2026through2047
above.
2071. Duringoneormorevisits to theParks,C.F.’sbeloveddaughterD.F.
sufferedanactualmeltdownwhileinC.F.’spresence.
2072. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.F.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjurytoD.F.underCalifornialaw.
2073. D.F.’s meltdown in the Parks was proximately caused by Disney’s
negligent, unlawful, reckless and arbitrary treatment ofD.F. during
his patronage of Disney’s facilities. At all material times, Disney
knewD.F. to be vulnerable to emotional injury if treated in such a
mannerbyanyone.
2074. C.F. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
D.F.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularlyin lightof
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 331 of 334 Page ID #:950
Page332
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
law and act in a gracious and caringmanner toward her daughter,
C.F.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
2075. C.F.’sobservationofD.F.’smeltdownandof theoutrageousconduct
and treatment which proximately caused D.F. to experience the
meltdown caused C.F. grave and extreme mental anguish and
emotionaltrauma,forwhichDisneyshouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.F. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding thatDisneynegligently inflictedemotionaldistressupon
C.F.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.F.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.F. in the amount of such
damages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
COUNT211
IntentionalInflictionofEmotionalDistress
C.F.v.Disney
2076. Plaintiff C.F. incorporates and re‐alleges the allegations of
paragraphs1through67,651through654,and2026through2047
above.
2077. During one or more visits to the Parks, C.F.’s beloved son D.F.
sufferedanactualmeltdown.
2078. The symptoms and conditions associated with D.F.’s meltdown
constituteaphysicalinjuryunderCalifornialaw.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 332 of 334 Page ID #:951
Page333
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
2079. D.F.’s meltdown in the Parks was proximately caused by Disney’s
outrageous, unlawful and reckless treatment of D.F. during her
patronage ofDisney’s facilities. At allmaterial times,Disney knew
D.F.tobevulnerabletoemotionalinjuryiftreatedinsuchamanner
byanyone.
2080. C.F. directly observed the stressors leading up to the meltdown,
D.F.’sresultingescalationandhismeltdown. Particularlyin lightof
her trust andconfidence thatDisneywouldcomplywithapplicable
law and act in a gracious and caringmanner toward her daughter,
C.F.coulddonothingreasonabletopreventthemeltdown.
2081. C.F.’sobservationofD.F.’smeltdownandof theoutrageousconduct
and treatment which proximately caused D.F. to experience the
meltdown caused C.F. grave and extreme mental anguish and
emotionaltrauma,forwhichDisneyshouldbeheldaccountable.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff C.F. prays that this Court adjudicate this
disputeandenteranOrder:
Finding that Disney intentionally inflicted emotional distress
uponC.F.;and
FindingsuchinflictiontohavecauseddamagestoC.F.;and
Entering judgment for Plaintiff C.F. in the amount of such
damages;
Entering judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and against Disney for
exemplaryorpunitivedamages;and
Awardingreasonablelitigationcostsasmaybedeterminedbythe
CourtinfavorofPlaintiffandagainstDisney;and
Awardingprejudgmentinterest;and
SuchotherreliefasthisCourtmayfindjustandequitable.
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 333 of 334 Page ID #:952
Page334
AMENDMENTTOCOMPLAINTA.L.,byandthroughD.L,etal.v.WaltDisneyParks&ResortsUS,Inc.,CaseNo.14‐cv‐3327
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOGALILAWGROUP,P.A.
Dated:___________________,2014
[email protected],P.A.101E.KennedyBlvd.,Suite1100Tampa,Florida33602Tel: (813)289‐0700Fax: (813)289‐9435
EUGENEFELDMANCaliforniaBarNo.118497gfeldmanlaw@att.netEugeneFeldman,AttorneyatLaw,APC555PierAvenue,Suite4HermosaBeach,CA90254Tel:(310)372‐4636Fax:(310)372‐4639AttorneysforPlaintiffs
Case 2:14-cv-03327-R-RZ Document 52-1 Filed 08/27/14 Page 334 of 334 Page ID #:953