# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 1- 33 36 /3 46 1

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Mi ch ael S. Arge nyi

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti ff - App el la nt

/C ro ss -App el le e

v.

Crei gh to n Un iv ers it y

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l D ef en da nt - App el le e/

Cr os s- App el la nt

----- ----- ----- ----- ----- -----

Uni te d S ta te s; Alex an de r Grah am Bel l As so ci at io n fo r th e Deaf a nd Hard of
Heari ng ; Nat io na l Di sa bi li ty Rig ht s Net wor k; Ass oc ia ti on of M ed ic al

Pro fes si on al s wi th Heari ng Los se s

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Amici o n Beh al f o f Ap pe ll an t/ Cr os s- App el le e

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of Ne br as ka - Om ah a

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 14 , 20 12
Fil ed : J an ua ry

15 , 20 13

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re MUR PHY, BENTON, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __

-1

-MURP HY, Circ ui t J ud ge

.

Mi ch ael Arg en y i, a y ou ng m an wit h a se rio us he ari ng im pa irment, m ov ed fro m

Seat tl e to Om ah a, Neb ras ka to at te nd m ed ic al sc ho ol at Crei gh to n Uni ve rs it y

. Befo re

en ro ll in g Arg en y i req ue st ed sp eci fic acco m m od at io ns fro m Crei gh to n fo r hi s he ari ng

im pa irment. The y were de ni ed

, bu t Arg en y i rep eat ed ly ren ewed th em du rin g hi s fir st

t wo y ears at Crei gh to n Med ic al Sch oo l. He ex pl ai ne d th at wit ho ut t h e s e

accom m oda tio ns he w as un ab le to fo ll ow le ct ur es , pa rti ci pa te in la bs

, or co m m un ic at e
wit h p at ie nt s.

Bec au se Crei gh to n fai le d to p r o vi de wha t he co ns id ered ne ces sa ry an d

reas on ab le acco m

m od at io ns , Arg en y i br ou gh t t h i s a ct io n un de r Tit le III of th e

Am eri can s wit h Dis ab il it ie s Act (ADA), 4 2 U

. S.C. § 12 18 2, an d § 50 4 of th e
Reh ab il it at io n Act, 29 U.S.C. § 79 4. The di st ric t co ur t de ci de d th at Arg en y i ha d no t

sh own hi s req ue st ed acco m m od at io ns were ne ces sa ry an d gr an te d sum m ar y j ud gm en t

to Crei gh to n whi le de nyin g it s m ot io n fo r co st s. Arg en y i an d Crei gh to n bo th ap pe al

. 1

W e rev ers e an d re m an d.

I.

Arg en y i beg an us in g hea rin g aid s befo re he w as on e y ear ol d, bu t hi s pare nt s

pr im ari ly co m

m un ic at ed wit h hi m th ro ug h sp ok en la ng ua ge

. To di st in gu is h be twee n

so un ds th at ap pe ar th e sa m e on a sp eak er’s li p s A r g e n yi rel ie d on "cu ed sp eech ,"

w h ic h us es ha nd si gn al s to rep res en t so un ds

. He do es no t kn ow si gn la ng u a g e

. I n
ei gh th gr ad e Arg en y i be ga n us in g C o mm un ic at io n Acces s Rea l-t im e Tran sc rip ti on (CART), a syste m whi ch tra ns cri be s sp ok en wor ds in to te xt on a co m p u t er sc reen

.

Sev eral am ic i su pp or t Arg en y i's ap pe al : Uni te d St at es Dep art m en t of Ju st ic e, 1

th e Alex an de r Grah am Bel l Ass oc ia ti on fo r th e Deaf an d Hard of Heari n g a n d
Nati on al Dis ab il it y Ri gh ts Netwo rk

, an d t h e A ss oc ia ti on of Med ic al Pro fes si on al s wit h Hea rin g Lo ss es

.

-2

-Arg en y i rece iv ed a co ch le ar imp l a n t i n hi s rig ht ear in Sep te m be r 20 04 be fo re he

be ga n un de rg rad ua te st ud ie s at Seat tl e Uni ve rs it y

. Tha t un iv ers it y pr ov id ed CART

fo r Arg en y i’s le ct ur es an d a cu ed sp eech in te rp ret er fo r hi s la b co ur se s, an d Arg en y i

gr ad ua te d fr om

Seat tl e in 20 08 wit h a 3.8 7 g rad e p oi nt av erag e.

Arg en y i st at ed in hi s ap pl ic at io n to Crei gh to n Uni ve rs it y Med ic al S c h o ol in

20 09 th at he was "h eari ng

- i m pa ire d." Upo n hi s ad m is si on Arg en y i ex pl ai ne d to

Mi ch ael Kav an , Crei gh to n's as so ci at e de an fo r st ud en t affa irs

, th at he wou ld req ui re

acco m m od at io n "s im il ar to wha t [h e] ha d us ed in th e pa st

. . . pr im ari ly in te rp ret at io n

or cap ti on in g se rv ic es du rin g le ct ur es an d te ach in g se ss io ns ." Dean Kav an as ke d fo r

m or e in fo rm at io n a bo ut th e na tu re of hi s he ari ng di sa bi li ty an d a m or e sp eci fic

req ue st for th e type o f acc om m od at io n h e n eed ed

.

Arg en y i's ot ol aryngo lo gi st

, Dr. Dou gl as Bac ko us , res po n d e d th at Arg en y i

"wo ul d b en efi t fro m cl os ed cap ti on in g" an d an FM syste m whi ch tra ns m it s so un d

di rect ly in to co ch le ar im

pl an ts

. Arg en y i al so ren ewed hi s req ue st s th at Crei gh to n

su pp ly CART for his le ct ur es , a cu ed sp eech in te rp ret er for lab s, and an FM sy st em

fo r sm al l l earn in g gro up s of eig ht st ud en ts or f ewer. Kav an rep li ed th at th e wri tt en

req ue st s su bm it te d by D r

. Bac ko us an d Arg en y i were in ad eq ua te be cau se th ey
di ffer ed an d t he do ct or

ha d n ot m ad e a "d ire ct req ue st ."

Befo re st art in g m ed ic al sc ho ol Arg en y i rece iv ed a bi la te ral co ch le ar im pl an t,

an d hi s im pl an t au di ol og is t an d Dr. Bac ko us bo th reco m m en de d th at to su ccee d in hi s

st ud ie s he wou ld al so ne ed CART, a cu ed sp eech in te rp ret er, an d th e FM syste m

. Dr.

Bac ko us wrot e to Crei gh to n t ha t Arg en y i "rem ai ns

. . . de af re ga rd le ss of i f he is or

i s n o t us in g hi s co ch le ar im pl an ts

. . . . [He] ha s a bi la te ral pr of ou nd se ns or in e u r a l

he ari ng lo ss ." Befo re Arg en y i's en ro ll m en t, Crei gh to n's med i c a l ed uc at io n

m an ag em en t te am m et to rev ie w hi s req ue st s fo r acco m m od at io n. Dean Kav an th en

in fo rm ed Arg en y i th at Crei gh to n wou ld pr ov id e hi m wit h an FM syste m fo r le ct ur es ,

sm al l gr ou ps , an d la bs

. Arg en y i ag reed to gi ve th e FM syste m "a who le he art ed try."

-3

-Sh or tl y be fo re cl as se s be ga n on Aug us t 16

, 20 09

, Arg en y i ren ewed hi s or ig in al

req ue st s fo r acco m

m od at io ns

. Crei gh to n de ni ed th em

. Afte r t r yin g th e FM syste m

fo r two week s, Arg en y i in fo rm ed Dean Kav an th at he ne ed e d to ob ta in CART fo r

hi m se lf. He wro te th e de an th at "[t ]he [u ni ve rs it y 's] acco m m od at io ns are in ad eq ua te

as ev id en ced by th e le ve l of st res s an d fat ig ue I a m e xp eri en ci ng , as well as th e

am ou nt of in fo rm at io n I am m is si n g

. . . . [The y ] do no t pr ov id e fo r m ean in gf ul

pa rti ci pa ti on no r in de pe nd e n c e a s a st ud en t, an d al so pu t m e at a si gn ifi can t

di sa dv an ta ge acad em ic al ly." Dr. Bac ko us wro te to Crei gh to n in su pp or t of Arg en y i's

ne ed s, u rg in g t ha t

It is im pe rat iv e th at [Arg en y i] ha ve acce ss to vi su al cu es fo r ev eryday

co m m un ic at io n an d ed uc at io n. Vis ua l cu es in cl ud e, bu t are no t li m it ed

to cl os ed cap ti on in g on vi de os a n d fil m s, real ti m e cap ti on in g fo r le ct ur es an d di sc us si on s, an d sp eech read in g cu es fo r on e-o n- on e in te ract io ns

.

The de an res po nd ed by offer in g Arg en y i o nl y en ha nc ed no te tak in g s erv ic es

.

In la te Sep te m

be r 20 09 Arg en y i br ou gh t th is act io n ag ai ns t Crei gh to n, al le gi ng

v i o l a t i on s of Tit le III of th e ADA an d § 50 4 of th e Reh ab il it at io n Act by th e

un iv ers it y 's fai lu re to pr ov id e "au xi li ary ai ds an d se rv ic es to en su re effe ct iv e

co m m un ic at io n an d an eq ua l op po rtu ni ty to pa rti ci pa te in an d be ne fit fro m th e Sch oo l

of Med ic in e." Arg en y i so ug ht a de cl ar at or y jud gm en t co m pe ll in g Crei gh to n to

pr ov id e hi m wit h "au xi li ary ai ds an d se rv ic es to en su re effe ct iv e co m m un ic at io n," as
well as c om

pe ns at or y da m ag es an d a tt or ne y

fees

.

Arg en y i co nt in ue d to at te nd cl as s an d pu rs ue hi s med ic al ed uc at io n. In

Feb ru ary 2 01 0 he co ns ul te d ear sp eci al is t Dr. Bri tt The di ng er as an ex pe rt wit ne ss

. Dr. The di ng er te st ed th e Cre ig ht on FM s y st em an d fo un d t ha t wi th th e ba ck gr ou nd

no is e th at Arg en y i ha d on ly 38 pe rcen t sp eech pe rcep ti on

. Dr. The di ng er de te rm in ed

-4

-th at "t he FM syste m do es no t pr ov id e an y si gn ifi can t be ne fit an d

. . . act ua ll y red uc es

[Arg en y i's ] di sc riminat io n a bi li ty."

Crei gh to n p ro vi de d n o fu rth er au xi li ary su pp or t or se rv ic es du rin g Arg en y i's

fir st y ear of m ed ic al sc ho ol

, an d Arg en y i bo rro wed ap pr ox im at el y $5 3,0 00 to pa y fo r

CART a n d i n te rp ret ers hi m se lf. In a do cu m en t pu bl ic ly av ai la bl e on it s web si te

, Crei gh to n es ti m at es th at th e fir st y ear of it s m ed ic al sc ho ol co st s a p p r o x i matel y $7 1,0 00 fo r an av erag e st ud en t be fo re fin an ci al ai d. Afte r pa y in g f o r h i s

acco m m od at io ns , th e effe ct iv e co st to Arg en y i fo r hi s fir st y ear of m ed ic al sc ho ol was

th eref or e m or e th an $1 20 ,00 0.

A rg en y i ren ewed hi s req ue st fo r acco m m od at io n be fo re hi s se co nd y ea r o f

m ed ic al sc ho ol

. In res po ns e Crei gh to n of fere d to pr ov id e an in te rp ret er fo r le ct ur es

an d a se at ne xt to th e in st ru ct or fo r sm al l gr ou p d i s c u s s i o ns

. Arg en y i fo un d th e

in te rp ret er no t su ffi ci en t to co nv ey c o mp l e x ne w vo cab ul ary an d ag ai n to ok ou t

ap pr ox im at el y

$6 1,0 00 in lo an s t o p ay

for CART.

The se co nd y ear c ur ric ul um in cl ud ed cl in ic al co ur se s in whi ch st ud en ts

in te rv ie wed an d c a r e d fo r pa ti en ts

. Fo r th os e co ur se s Crei gh to n refu se d to al lo w Arg en y i to us e an in te r p r e t e r e v e n i f he pa id fo r on e hi m se lf. Arg en y i tri ed th e
cl in ic al co ur se s wit ho ut an in te rp ret er fo r ap pr ox im at el y two week s an d th en ren ewed

hi s re qu es t fo r on e. As h e ex pl ai ne d o n S ep te m be r 21 , 20 10

,

I m et wit h pa ti en ts

. . . an d fo un d th at I co ul d no t un de rs ta nd al l of wha t

pa ti en ts an d o th ers at th e cl in ic sa id

. W it h so m e pa ti en ts I un de rs to od

ve ry li tt le

. . . . I kn ow y ou sa id I on ly ha ve to s h o w u p to pa ss , bu t I

wan t to le arn ho w to be a do ct or an d I th in k it is im po rta nt to un de rs ta nd
wha t t he pa ti en ts are s ay in g t o m e.

Arg en y i an d C rei gh to n e nt ered in to set tl em en t ne go ti at io ns in Ja nu ary 2 01 1,

an d th e un iv ers it y te m

pora ril y pr ov id ed hi m wit h an in te rp ret er in hi s cl in ic al co ur se s.

-5

-Set tl em en t ta lk s en de d th e fo ll owi ng m on th

, ho wev er, an d Arg en y i was ag ai n

pr oh ib it ed fro m us in g an in te rp ret er. Arg en y i ne ve rth el es s su ccee de d in pa ss in g hi s
cl in ic al an d ot he r co ur se s, bu t aft er hi s se co nd y ea r h e t oo k a le av e of ab se nc e

pe nd in g t he res ol ut io n o f hi s cl ai m s u nd er t he ADA and th e Reh ab il it at io n Act

.

In Ju ly 20 11 Arg en y i an d Crei gh to n bo th m ov ed fo r su m m ary jud gm en t. The

di st ric t co ur t gr an te d su m m ary jud gm en t to Crei gh to n aft er it co nc lu de d th at (1 )
Arg en y i ha d no t sh own th e acco m m od at io ns he req ue st ed were "n eces sa ry " wit hi n

th e m ean in g of t h e st at ut es an d (2 ) th at Crei gh to n ha d pr ov id ed "ef fect iv e

co m m un ic at io n" as req ui red by bo th la ws. The co ur t al so reject ed Arg en y i's affi da vi t

as "u ns up po rte d se lf- se rv in g al le ga ti on s," de ni ed hi m rel ie f, an d or de red each pa rty

to pa y it s o wn co st s.

Arg en y i app eal s th e di st ric t co ur t's gr an t of sum m ary jud gm en t to Crei gh to n.
Crei gh to n cro ss ap pe al s th e d en ia l o f co st s, as se rti ng th at th e d is tri ct co ur t erred by

fai li ng to pro vi de a su pp or ti ng rat io na le

.

II.

Thi s co ur t rev ie ws a di s t r i ct co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t de no vo

. Mi nn es ot a ex rel

. N. Pac. Ct r., In c. v. BNSF R.R. Co

., 6 8 6 F

. 3 d 5 6 7

, 5 71 (8 th Ci r.

20 12 )

. F a c t s m

us t be co ns tru ed fav or ab ly to th e lo si ng pa rty, an d Arg en y i is to be
gi ve n th e be ne fit of al l reas on ab le in fere nc es in th e reco rd

. Id

. Su m m ary jud gm en t

is ap pr op ria te on ly if no ge nu in e di sp ut e ex is ts "as to an y mat e r i a l fact an d th e

m ov an t is en ti tl ed to jud gm en t as a m at te r of la w." I d

. ( c i t a ti on om it te d)

. To

es ta bl is h a ge nu in e is su e of m at eri al fact

, Arg en y i m ay no t "m erel y po in t to se lfse rv in g al le ga ti on s, bu t m us t su bs ta nt ia te al le ga ti on s wit h su ffi ci en t pr ob a t i v e

ev id en ce th at wou ld pe r mi t a fin di ng in [h is ] fav or ." Dav id so n & Ass oc s. v. Ju ng , 42 2 F.3 d 63 0, 63 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 0 5 ) ( c i ta ti on om it te d)

. A "p art y 's own te st im on y is

of te n se lf- se rv in g," bu t th e m ere fact th at Arg en y i's fact ua l te st im on y is fav or ab le to

-6

-hi s le ga l cl ai m do es no t ren de r it in co m pe te nt

. C.R. Pi tt m an Co ns t. Co

., In c. v. Nat'l

Fi re In s. Co . of Har tfo rd , 45 3 F . App 'x 4 39 , 44 3 (5 th Cir . 20 11 ).

A.

In gr a n t i ng su m

m ary jud gm en t to Crei gh to n th e di st ric t co ur t di sr eg ard ed
Arg en y i's affi da vi t, te rm ed it "s el f-s erv in g," an d co nc lu de d th at "t h e r e [ was ] an
ab se nc e of e v i d e n c e t o su pp or t [h is ] cl ai m ." The re was , ho wev er, a va rie ty of

su pp or ti ng ev id en ce in t h e r e co rd

. Arg en y i's affi da vi t m us t be co ns id ered

, an d it s

pa rti cu la r fact ua l al le ga ti on s sc ru ti ni zed fo r "i nd ep en de nt do cu m en ta ry ev id en ce" to

su pp or t th em

. O'Bryan v. KTIV Tele vi si on , 64 F.3 d 11 88

, 11 91 (8 th Ci r. 19 95 ). In

a cas e su ch as th is it is es pe ci al ly im po rta nt to co ns id er th e co m pl ai na nt 's te st im on y

ca r e fu ll y be cau se "t he in di vi du al wit h a di sa bi li ty is m os t fam il ia r wit h hi s or he r
di sa bi li ty an d is in th e be st po si ti on to de te rm in e wha t ty pe of a id or se rv ic e wil l be

effe ct iv e." U.S. Dep 't o f J us ti ce, The Am eri can s wit h Dis ab il it ie s Act Tit le II

Tech ni cal Ass is ta nc e Ma nu al , at II –7 .11 00 (19 93 ).

Arg en y i te st ifi ed in hi s affi da vi t th a t w i t h o ut CART an d in te rp ret ers he was

"u na bl e to fo ll ow cl as s le ct ur es an d cl as sr oo m di al og ue " or "t he rap id pa ce of

di al og ue in th e cl in ic al set ti ng ." He st at ed th at he "b eg an ex pe rie nc in g deb il it at in g
he ad ach es an d ex tre m e fat ig ue " fro m hi s "fr ui tl es s at te m pt s" to fo ll ow le ct ur es , ev en

th ou gh he ha d "u ti li zed al l of [h is ] ti m e ou ts id e of th e cl as sr oo m tryin g to ob ta in th e

in fo rm at io n t he ot he r st ud en ts ob ta in ed in th e cl as sr oo m ."

In cl in ic al co ur se s Argen y i an d hi s pa ti en ts freq ue nt ly fai le d to co m m un ic at e

effe ct iv el y

. He de sc rib ed in hi s affi da vi t a "co ns ul t wit h th e pa ren ts of a two m on th

ol d, wit h co m

m un ic at io n li m it ed su ch th at [h e] di d no t kn ow

. . . why th e in fan t was

h o s p i t al iz ed ," as well as hi s st ru gg le to co m m un ic at e wit h "em ot io na l fam il y

m em be rs , pa ti en ts wit h acce nt s, an d

. . . a pa ti en t w i t h a h is to ry of a br ok en jaw."
Arg en y i st at ed th at Crei gh to n ha d do n e " n o t h i ng to rem ed y [h is ] in ab il it y to

-7

-un de rs ta nd wha t was ha pp en in g in th e cl in ic " an d ev en tu al ly ad vi se d hi m to "re frai n

fro m m ak in g re qu es ts for ad di ti on al au xi li ary ai ds an d s erv ic es ."

Afte r a care fu l rev ie w o f th e reco rd , we can no t ag ree wit h th e di st ric t co ur t's

co nc lu si on th at Arg en y i's al le ga ti on s were "u ns up po rte d." The reco rd co nt ai ns fiv e
le tt ers fro m Arg en y i's do ct or s to Crei gh to n co nf irming hi s n e e d fo r ad di ti on al

au xi li ary ai d s a n d se rv ic es

. Dr. Bac ko us wro te to Crei gh to n du rin g Arg en y i's fir st

m on th of m ed ic al sc ho ol th at "[i ]t is im pe rat iv e th at [Arg en y i] ha ve acce ss to vi su al

cu es fo r ev eryday co m

m un ic at io n an d ed uc at io n," in cl ud in g "b ut

. . . no t li m it ed to "

cl os ed cap ti on in g, CART, an d a cu ed sp eec h in te rp ret er. He ur ge d Crei gh to n to

co ns id er Arg en y i's sp eci fic req ue st s, ex pl ai ni ng th at Arg en y i "i s th e be st pe rs o n t o jud ge wha t [as si st an ce m ay be ne ces sa ry ] si nc e no on e el se can real ly u n d e r s t a nd

wha t h e is he ari ng th ro ug h h is co ch le ar i m pl an t s y st em s."

Crei gh to n al so rece iv ed a rep or t fro m Dr. The di ng er pr io r to Arg en y i's se co nd

y ear, st at in g th at th e FM syste m act ua ll y wor se ne d Arg en y i's sp eech di sc riminat io n
ab il it y to 38 pe rcen t co m

pr eh en si on

. In ad di ti on th e reco rd co nt ai ns co rres po nd en ce
be twe e n A r g e n y i an d Crei gh to n in whi ch he rep eat ed req ue st s fo r an in te rp ret er in

cl in ic al co ur se s, whi ch were al l de ni ed

. Dur in g hi s fir st two y ears of m ed ic al sc ho ol

, Arg en y i b or ro wed m or e th an $1 00 ,00 0 t o p ay for th e au xi li ary ai ds an d s erv ic es he

ne ed ed to ob ta in th e m ed ic al ed uc at io n he so ug ht

, an d whi ch Crei gh to n dec li ne d to

pr ov id e.

Arg en y i's affi da vi t, co rro bo rat ed by ev id en ce fro m Dr. Bac k o us an d Dr.

The di ng er an d hi s own ne e d t o o b t a in pr iv at e lo an s fo r CART an d in te rp ret ers ,
pr ov id es st ro ng ev id en ce th at Crei gh to n's acco m m od at io ns were in ad eq ua te an d th at

th e un iv ers it y was no t en ti tl ed to su m m ary jud gm en t. We co nc lu de th at th e di st ric t

co ur t erre d by di sr eg ard in g Arg en y i's affi da vi t, th e "i nd ep en de nt do cu m en ta ry

ev id en ce" of

fere d in it s su pp or t, an d al l asp ect s of th e reco rd be fo re it

. O'Bryan, 64

F.3 d a t 1 19 1.

-8

-B.

The ev id en ce pr es en te d by Arg en y i m us t be vi ew e d un de r th e le ga l st an da rd

fo r ADA an d Reh ab il it at io n Act cl ai m s. To as se rt hi s di sc rimin a t i o n c la im un de r
ei th er sta tu te

, Arg en y i m

us t sh ow th at (1 ) he is di sa bl ed an d acad em ic al ly qu al ifi ed

to at te nd Crei gh to n, (2 ) Crei gh t o n i s a "p la ce of pu bl ic acco m m od at io n (fo r ADA

pu rp os es ) an d rece iv es fed eral fu nd in g ( f o r R e h a bi li ta ti on Act pu rp os es )," an d (3 )

Crei gh to n di sc riminat ed ag ai ns t hi m ba se d on hi s d i s a b i l i ty. Mer sh on v. St

. Lou is

Uni v., 44 2 F.3 d 10 69

, 10 76 –7 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ). The re i s n o d is pu te he re as to th e

fir st two el em en ts

. The ke y qu es ti on is whe th er C r e i g h t o n di sc riminat ed ag ai ns t

A r g e n yi by fai li ng to pr ov id e ne ces sa ry au xi li ary ai ds an d se rv ic es du rin g hi s f i r s t

y ear of m ed ic al sc ho ol an d by refu si ng to pe rm it Arg en y i to us e an in te rp ret er du rin g

hi s s eco nd y ear c li ni c.

1.

Co ng res s reco gn iz ed in en act in g th e ADA th at "i nd iv id ua ls wit h di sa bi li ti es

co nt in ua ll y en co un te r va rio us fo rm s of di sc riminat io n, in cl ud in g

. . . co m m un ic at io n
ba rri ers ." 42 U.S.C. § 12 10 1( a)(5 ). The pu rp os e of th e ADA was to "p ro vi de cl ear,

st ro ng , c on si st en t, en f

or ceab le st an da rd s" to rem ed y di sc riminat io n in em pl oym en t (Tit le I), in th e se rv ic es of pu bl ic en ti ti es (Tit le II), an d in pl aces of pu bl ic

acco m m od at io n (Tit le III). Id

. § 12 10 1( b) (2 ). Und er Tit le III of th e ADA, pl aces of

pu bl ic acc om

m oda tio n inc lud e "un de rg ra duat e[] or po st gr ad ua te pr iv at e sc ho ol s" li ke

Crei gh to n. 2 8 C .F.R. § 3 6.1 04

.

D i sc riminat io n is de fin ed by th e ADA as a fai lu re to "m ak e reas on a b l e

m od ifi cat io ns in po li ci es , pr act ic es , or pr oc ed ur es " t ha t ar e "n eces sa ry to affo rd

. . .
pr iv il e g e s , ad va nt ag es , or acco m m od at io ns to in di vi du al s wit h di sa bi li ti es " or a

fai lu re to "t ak e su ch st ep s as m ay be n e c e s s a r y t o e ns ur e th at no in di vi du al wit h a
di sa bi li ty i s

. . . t r e a t e d di ffer en tl y th an ot he r in di vi du al s be cau se of th e ab se nc e of

-9

-au xi li ary ai ds an d s e rv ic es ." Id

. § 12 18 2( b) (2 )(A)(i i), (ii i). In fu rth eran ce of th e

co ng res si on al pu rp os e, Tit le III of th e ADA pr oh ib it s pl aces of pu bl ic

acco m m od at io n su ch as Crei gh to n fro m di sc riminat in g ag ai n s t in di vi du al s wit h

di sa bi li ti es "i n th e fu ll an d eq ua l en joyment " of th e "p riv il eg es , ad va nt ag es , or

acco m m od at io ns " t he y

off er. 4 2 U.S.C. § 12 18 2( a).

Co ng res s sp eci fic al ly in te nd ed th e ADA to rem ed y "t he di sc riminat or y effe ct s

of

. . . com m

un ic at io n b arri ers " fo r in di vi du al s wi th he ari ng di sa bi li ti es

. 42 U.S.C.
§ 12 10 1( a)(5 ). Reg ul at io ns pr om ul ga te d un de r Tit le III of th e ADA req ui re th e

pr ov i s i o n of "ap pr op ria te au xi li ary ai ds an d se rv ic es whe re ne ces sa ry to en su re

effe ct iv e co m

m uni ca tio n w ith ind ivi dua ls w it h di sa bi li ti es ," 28 C.F.R. § 36 .30 3( c)(1 ),

an d in st ru ct pl aces of pu bl ic acco mm o d a t i on to "co ns ul t wit h in di vi du al s wit h

di sa bi li ti es whe ne ve r po ss ib le to de te rm in e w h a t t y pe of au xi li ary ai d is ne ed ed to

en su re effe ct iv e co m

m un ic at io n," id

. § 36 .30 3( c)(1 )(i i). The reg ul at io ns sp eci fic al ly

pr ov id e tha t ap pr opr ia te aids an d se rv ic es fo r de af in di vi du al s in cl ud e in te rp ret ers an d

CART. Id . § 3 6.3 03 (b )(1 ).

The Reh ab il it at io n Act is si m il ar to th e ADA. Co ng res s en act ed t h e
Reh ab il it at io n Act a s a "co m pr eh en si ve fed eral pr og ram ," Co ns ol

. Rai l Co rp

. v.

Darro ne , 46 5 U.S. 62 4, 62 6 (1 98 4)

, to en su re th at in di vi du al s wit h di sa bi li ti es wou ld

no t "b e de ni ed th e be ne fit s of [] or be su bjec te d to di sc riminat io n un de r an y pr og ram

or act iv it y " rec ei vi ng fed eral fun di ng , 29 U.S.C. § 7 94 (a). To ach ie ve th at pu rp os e

th e Reh ab il it at io n Act req ui res en ti ti es rece iv in g fed eral fu nd in g to fu rn is h au xi li ary

ai ds whi ch "af

fo rd ha nd ic ap pe d pe rs on s eq ua l op po rtu ni ty to ob ta in th e sa m e res ul t,

to ga in th e sa m e be n e f

i t

, o r to reac h th e sa m e le ve l of ach ie ve m en t" as ot he rs

. 45

C.F.R. § 84 .4(b )(2 ). Cr e i g h t o n rece iv es fin an ci al as si st an ce fro m fed eral ag en ci es

in cl ud in g th e Dep art m en t of Edu cat io n, so it m us t co m pl y w i t h § 50 4 of th e
Reh ab il it at io n Act

.

-1 0-Bo th th e ADA an d th e Reh ab il it at io n Act are in te nt io na ll y br oa d in sc op e, bu t

th ey do no t req ui re i n s ti tu ti on s to pr ov id e al l req ue st ed au xi li ary ai ds an d se rv ic es

. In st ead

, each st at ut e req ui res th e res po ns ib le pa rti es to pr ov id e "n eces sa ry " au xi li ary

a i d s a n d se rv ic es to in di vi du al s wit h di sa bi li ti es

. 42 U.S.C. § 12 18 2( b) (2 )(A)( i i )
(ADA); 34 C.F.R. § 1 0 4

. 4 4 ( d ) (1 ) (Reh ab il it at io n Act)

. Si nc e th e ADA an d th e
Reh ab il it at io n Act are "s im il ar in su bs ta nc e," we tre at th e cas e la w in te rp ret in g th em

as "i nt erch an ge a b l e." Gor m an v. Bart ch

, 15 2 F.3 d 90 7, 91 2 (8 th Ci r. 19 98 ). Our

co ur t ha s nev er det erm in ed th e de fin it io n of "ne ces sa ry " un de r Tit le III of th e ADA

so we m us t co ns ul t th e Reh ab il it at io n Act st an da rd s as we co ns id er Arg en y i's cl ai m s

un de r th at st at ut e an d u nd er Tit le III o f th e ADA.

2.

The Su pr em e Co ur t ha s he ld th at § 50 4 of th e Reh ab il it at io n Act req ui res th at

"an ot he rwis e qu al ifi ed ha nd ic ap pe d in di vi du al m us t be pr ov id ed wit h mea ni ng fu l

acce ss to th e be ne fit th at th e gr an te e of fers ." Alex an de r v. Ch oa te

, 46 9 U.S. 28 7, 30 1
(1 98 5)

. In ap pl y in g Alex an de r, ou r co ur t has co nc lu de d th at th e Reh ab il it at io n Act

req ui res a pr iv at e m ed ic al sc ho ol to pr ov id e "re as on ab le acco m m od at io ns

. . . whe n

a di sa bl ed st ud en t wou ld ot he rwis e be de ni ed m ean in gf ul acce ss to a u n i v e rs it y ."

St ern v. Un iv . of Os te op at hi c Me d. & Heal th Sci en ces , 2 20 F.3 d 90 6, 90 8 (8 th Cir

. 20 00 ) (ci ti ng Alex an de r, 46 9 U.S. at 30 1)

. In th at cas e, a dysle xi c st ud en t at a pr iv at e

m ed ic al un iv ers it y su e d t h e un iv ers it y un de r § 50 4 of th e Reh ab il it at io n Act fo r

fai li ng to pr ov id e reas on ab le acco m m od at io ns in te st in g. Id

. at 90 7. W e affi rm ed th e
di st ric t co ur t's gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t to th e un iv ers it y aft er co nc lu di ng th at th e

st ud en t ha d "fa il ed to es ta bl is h a ne xu s be twee n hi s req ue st ed te st in g sc he m e an d hi s dysle xi a." Id . at 9 09

.

W e al so ap pl ie d a "m ean in gf ul acce ss " st an da rd to a Reh ab il it at io n Act cl ai m
br ou gh t by a he ari ng im pa ire d pr is on er a g ai ns t th e Mi ss ou ri Dep art m en t of

Co rrec ti on s fo r ha vi ng de ni ed hi m a n i nt erp ret er du rin g in te rn al di sc ip li na ry

-1 1-pr oc eed in gs

. Ran do lp h v. Ro dg ers , 17 0 F.3d 85 0, 85 8 (8 th Ci r. 19 99 ). The di st ric t

co ur t in th at cas e ha d gr an te d th e pr is on er su m m ary jud gm en t aft er de te rm in in g th at
"[t ]he un di sp ut ed ev id en ce . . . sh ow[ ed ] th at alt ho ug h h e h a[d ] be en pro vi de d wi th

so m e

. . . be ne fit s , h e h a [ d ] n o t rece iv ed th e fu ll be ne fit s so le ly be cau se of hi s
di sa bi li ty." Id. W e aff

irmed on ap pe al

, co nc lu di ng th at th e reco rd di d n ot "co nt ai n
cred ib le ev id en ce to su pp or t a fin di ng th at [th e pr is on er] en joy ed m ean in gf

ul acce ss

to th e p ris on 's i nt ern al di sc ip li na ry pro ces s." Id.

Und er a "m ean in gf

ul acce ss " st an da rd

, we ha ve de ci de d th at ai ds an d se rv ic es

" a r e n o t req ui red to pr od uc e th e id en ti cal res ul t or le ve l of ach ie ve m en t fo r

ha nd ic ap pe d an d no nh a n d i c ap pe d pe rs on s," bu t th ey ne ve rth el es s "m us t affo rd

ha nd ic ap pe d pe rs on s eq ua l op po rtu ni ty to

. . . ga in th e sa m e be ne fit ." Loye v. Cn ty.

of Dak ot a, 62 5 F.3 d 49 4, 49 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 1 0) (ci ti ng Alex an de r, 46 9 U.S. at 30 5)

. The Elev en th C irc ui t ha s si m il arl y co nc lu de d th at th e "p ro pe r in qu iry" un de r th e
Reh ab il it at io n Act to de te rm in e if a ho sp it al ha d pr ov id ed "n eces sa ry " au xi li ary ai ds

to a he ari ng im

pa ire d pa ti en t was whe th er th e pr of fere d ai ds "g av e th at pa ti en t an

eq ua l op po rtu ni ty to be ne fit fro m th e ho sp it al 's tre at m en t." Li e s e v

. I nd ia n Ri ve r

Cn ty. Hos p. Dis t., 70 1 F.3 d 33 4, 34 3 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 12 ). A s t h e co ur t ob se rv ed in

Lies e, th at in qu iry " i s i n h eren tl y fact -in te ns iv e" an d "l arg el y de pe nd s on co nt ex t."

Id . at 3 42 –4 3.

The m ean in gf

ul acce ss st an da rd to en su re an eq ua l o pp or tu ni ty is co ns is te nt

wit h th e pu rp os e of Tit le III of th e ADA, whi ch is to en su re th at al l pe op le ha ve "fu ll

an d eq ua l en

joy m en t" of pu bl ic acco m m od at io ns reg ard le ss of di sa bi li ty. 42 U.S.C.
§ 1 2 1 8 2 ( a )

. We co nc lu de th at § 50 4 of th e Reh ab il it at io n Act an d Tit le III of th e

ADA each req ui re Crei gh to n to pr ov id e reas on ab le au xi li a r y a i d s an d se rv ic es to

affo rd Arg en y i "m ean in gf ul acce ss " or an eq ua l op po rtu ni ty to ga in th e sa m e be ne fit

as hi s n on di sa bl ed pe ers

.

-1 2-The Nin th Ci rcu it ap pl ie d a si m il ar s ta nd ard to a cl ai m ari si ng un de r Tit le III

of th e ADA. See Bau gh m an v. W al t Dis ne y W or ld Co

., 68 5 F.3 d 11 31

, 11 35 (9 th

Ci r. 20 12 ). The re, th e di st ric t co ur t ha d gr an te d su m m ary jud gm en t to th e de fen da nt

aft er co nc lu di ng th at Bau gh m an ha d fai le d to sh ow th at it was "n eces sa ry " fo r he r to

u se a Seg way to vi si t Dis ne y la nd be cau se sh e wou ld no t ha ve be en "ef f e c t i v e l y

ex cl ud ed " wit ho ut it

. 69 1 F. Su pp

. 2d 10 92

, 10 95 (C.D. Cal

. 2 0 1 0)

. The Nin th

Ci rcu it rev ers ed

, reas on in g th at th e ADA "g ua ran te es th e di sa bl ed m or e th an m ere

acce ss to pu bl ic faci li ti es ; i t g ua ran te es th em 'fu ll an d e qu al en

joy m en t.'" 68 5 F.3 d

at 11 35 (q uo ti ng 42 U.S.C. § 12 18 2( a)). The ap pe ll at e c ou rt in st ru ct ed th e Dis ne y

co m pa ny to "s ta rt by co ns id eri ng ho w th ei r faci li ti es are us ed by no n- di sa bl ed gu es ts

an d th en ta ke reas on ab le st ep s to pr ov id e di sa bl ed gu es ts wit h a li ke ex pe rie nc e." Id

.

Co ns id eri ng A rg en y i' s Re ha bil ita tio n A ct an d ADA cl ai m s to ge th er, th e di st ric t

co ur t gr an te d su m

m ary jud gm en t to Crei gh to n aft er co nc lu di ng th at Arg en y i ha d

fai le d to sh ow th at hi s req ue st ed acco m m od at io ns were ne ces sa ry as req ui red un de r

th e ADA. The di st ric t cou rt l oo ke d t o g ui da nc e fro m th e Su pr em e Co ur t's de ci si on

in PGA Tou r, In c. v. Mar ti n, 53 2 U.S. 66 1 (2 00 1)

, a qu it e di ffer en t cas e fro m th e on e
br ou gh t by Arg en y i. In Mar ti n, a pr of es si on al go lfe r wit h a de ge ne rat iv e ci rcu la to ry
di so rd er so ug ht to tra ve l in a go lf cart be twee n th e ei gh te en ho le s at t o u r n a men t s.
The Co ur t di st in gu is he d th at go lfe r fro m "p la y ers wit h le ss se rio us affl ic ti on s th at

m ak e walk in g th e co ur se un co m fo rta bl e or di ffi cu lt

, bu t n o t be y on d th ei r cap aci ty.

In su ch cas es , an acco m

m od at io n m ig ht be reas on ab le bu t no t ne ces sa ry ." Id

. at 68 2
(em ph as is ad de d)

.

Here, t he di st ric t co ur t co m pa red Arge nyi's s it ua ti on no t wi th th e g ol fer wi th

th e de ge ne rat iv e di so rd er who ob ta in ed rel ie f in Mar ti n bu t wit h th os e "p la y ers wit h

le ss se rio us affl ic ti on s" fo r who m walk in g th e co ur se was "n ot be y on d th ei r cap ac ity

. "

W it h th is fau l t y an al og y th e co ur t reas on ed th at by us e of th e au xi li ary ai ds an d

se rv ic es Crei gh to n d i d su pp ly, Arg en y i's m ed ic al sc ho ol ex pe rie nc e, al th ou gh

"u nc om fo rta bl e or di ffi cu lt ," was no t "b ey on d [h is ] cap aci ty." Si nc e Arg en y i ha d no t

-1 3-b e e n "ef

fect iv el y ex cl ud ed " fro m Crei gh to n, hi s req ue st ed ad di ti on al ai ds an d

se rv ic es were no t "n eces sa ry " un de r t h e A D A. Ove rlo ok in g Arg en y i's ev id en ce

w h i c h sh owe d th at as pe ct s of hi s m ed ic al ed uc at io n at Crei gh to n were be yo n d h i s

cap aci ty wit ho ut th e acco m m od a t i o n s he req ue st ed

, th e co ur t fai le d to m ak e th e

ap pr op ria te co m

pa ris on wit h t he go lfe r wit h t he de ge ne rat iv e d is or de r in Mart in

.

The Mar ti n Cou rt in di cat ed th at it s ru li ng was na rro w an d m os t si gn ifi can tl y , it st at ed th a t i t was no t de ci di ng th e de fin it io n of "n eces sa ry " in th e co nt ex t of th e ADA, si nc e th e PGA Tou r ha d co nc ed ed th at Mar ti n's req ue st ed mo d i f i c at io n was
bo th " reas on ab le " an d "n eces sa ry ." 53 2 U.S. at 68 3 n.3 8. The "n arro w di sp ut e"

be fo re th e Co ur t was "wh et he r al lo win g Mar ti n to us e a go lf cart

, de sp it e th e walk in g

req ui rem en t th at ap pl ie s to th e PGA Tou r

. . . i s a m od ifi cat io n th at wou ld

'fu nd am en ta ll y

alt er th e na tu re'" of th e go lf to ur na m en t. Id . a t 68 2. That arg um en t

ha d be en un de rm in ed by th e di st ric t co ur t's fin di ng th at "t he fat ig ue [fo r ot he r go lfe rs ]

fro m walk in g d ur in g o ne of [ it s] to ur na m en ts can no t b e d eem ed si gn ifi can t." Id

. at

68 7. Here, th ere is no al le ga ti on th at Arg en y i is se ek in g an y "co m pe ti ti ve ad va nt ag e"

ov er o th er m ed ic al st ud en ts . See i d. at 67 0– 71

. 2

To th e ex te nt th at t h e d i s t ric t co ur t in te rp ret ed Mar ti n to m ean th at th e wor d

" n e c e s sa ry " in th e ADA req ui res a sh owi ng th at th e cl ai m an t ha s be en effe ct iv el y

ex cl ud ed f

r o m a p la ce of pu bl ic acco m m od at io n, it wou ld be in co ns is te nt wit h th e

co ng res si on al pu rp os e of th e ADA an d th e R e h a b i l it at io n Act. In Tit le III of th e

ADA an d § 50 4 of th e Reh ab il it at io n Act, Co ng res s req ui red pu bl ic acco m m od at io ns

Am ic us th e Uni te d St at es Dep art m en t of Ju st ic e si m il arl y arg ue s th at 2

na vi ga ti ng th e go lf co ur se in Mar ti n "i s far di ffer en t fro m a p e r s o n ' s a b il it y to

un de rs ta nd wha t is sp ok en in cl as sr oo m or cl in ic al in st ru ct io n in m ed ic al sc ho ol ," an d
th at "[n ]oth in g su gg es ts th at th e Co ur t's co m m en ts ab ou t a pr of

es si on al at hl et e's
fat ig ue an d di sc om fo rt du rin g co m pe ti ti on ap pl y to in di vi du al s wit h he ari ng im pa irments see ki ng au xi li ary ai ds an d s erv ic es to en su re ef fect iv e co m

m un ic at io n in an acad em ic set ti ng ."

-1 4-a n d e n t i ti es whi ch rece iv e pu bl ic fu nd in g to fu rn is h reas on ab le au xi li ary ai ds a n d

se rv ic es so th at al l in di vi du al s hav e an eq ua l op po rtu ni ty to ga in "a li ke " or "equ al "

be ne fit

. Bau gh m an , 6 85 F.3 d at 1 1 3 5 ; Li e s e , 71 0 F.3 d at 34 3. Rat he r th an m erel y

en su re tha t Argen y i is no t "effe ct iv el y ex cl ud ed " fro m it s m ed ic al sch oo l, the ADA

an d th e Reh ab il it at io n Act req ui re Crei gh to n to "s ta rt by co ns id eri ng ho w [it s
ed uc at io na l pro gr am s] are us ed by no n- di sa bl ed [m ed ic al sc ho ol st ud en ts ] an d th en

ta ke reas on ab le st ep s to pr ov id e [Arg en y i] wit h a li ke ex pe rie nc e." Bau gh m an , 68 5

F.3 d a t 1 13 5.

W e co nc lu de th at th e ev id en ce pr od uc ed in th is cas e crea te d a ge nu in e is su e

of m at eri al fact as to whe th er Crei gh to n de ni ed Arg en y i an eq ua l op po rtu ni ty to ga in

th e sa m e be ne fit fro m m ed ic al sc ho ol as hi s no nd is ab le d pe ers by refu si ng to pr ov id e

hi s req ue st ed acco m

m od at io ns

. At th is st ag e th e reco rd su pp or ts Arg en y i's cl ai m th at

he was un ab le to fo ll ow le ct ur es an d cl as sr oo m dia log ue or succ es sf ul ly co m m un ic at e
wit h c li ni cal pa ti en ts . From su ch ev id en ce a reas on ab le fact fin de r co ul d d et erm in e

th at Arg en y i was de ni ed an op po rtu ni ty to be ne fit fro m m ed ic al sc ho ol eq ua l to th at

o f h is no nd is ab le d cl as sm at es

. The di st ric t co ur t's gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t t o
Crei gh to n s ho ul d t he refo re b e rev ers ed an d t he cas e rem an de d. 3

III.

Crei gh to n ha s cro ss ap pe al ed

, co nt en di ng th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d by

de nyin g it s req ue st fo r co st s wit ho ut pr ov id in g a rat io na le fo r do in g so

. See Fed

. R.

Ci v. P. 54 (d )(1 ). W e ne ed no t co ns id er th at arg um en t be cau se at th is st ag e Crei gh to n

ha s n ot qu al ifi ed as a pre va il in g p art y an d t he refo re i s no t en ti tl ed to co st reco ve ry

.

On rem an d Crei gh to n m ay al so su bm it ev id en ce of th e co st of Arg en y i's 3

req ue st ed au xi li ary ai ds an d se rv ic es fo r a de te rm in at io n of whe th er pr ov id in g th em

w o ul d im

po se an un du e bu rd en on th e un iv ers it y

. See 42 U.S.C

. § 1 21 82 (b )(2 )(A)(i ii ) (ADA); 2 9 U.S.C. § 79 4a (a)( 1) (Reh ab il it at io n Act ).

-1 5-See Po tt ge n v. Mo

. St at e Hig h Sch

. Acti vi ti es Ass 'n, 10 3 F.3 d 72 0, 72 3– 24 (8 th Ci r.

19 97 ).

IV.

Acco rd in gl y , we rev ers e th e su m m ary jud gm en t gr an te d to Crei gh to n an d

rem an d fo r fu rth er p ro ceed in gs co ns is te nt wit h t hi s o pi ni on

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-1 6-