Hearing Loss Law : Washington Hearing Loss Lawyer & Attorney : John Waldo Law Firm : Hard of Hearing, Disability, Hearing Impairment : Seattle, Bainbridge, Washington, Pacific Northwest

The lawyers have written their legal briefs, and we hope that by the end of next month, we'll know whether a Washington court agrees with us that our state Law against Discrimination requires movie theaters to show captioned films.

Oral argument is scheduled for Friday, April 16, on cross-motions filed by Wash-CAP and by the five corporate entities that operate movie multiplexes in the Seattle area.
 

Our motion is for partial summary judgment. We want the court to declare that under Washington state law, movie theaters are required to do whatever is "reasonably possible in the circumstances" to show captioned films that are understandable and therefore accessible to people with hearing loss of such a magnitude that the volume-enhancing Assistive Listening Devices offered by the theaters are insufficient. Should the court issue such a ruling, we would then undertake discovery into the economic aspects of movie exhibition and determine how much captioning each of the theater defendants can due before the cost becomes an undue burden.

The theater chains have filed a motion for summary judgment, asking that the case be thrown out altogether. They claim that all they are require to do is afford physical access to the theaters, and allow us to purchase tickets to non-captioned movies on the same terms as everyone else.
 

Each side has filed a legal brief supporting its position, and then has filed a brief responding to the other side's position. Here is a link to our opening brief, the theaters' opening brief, our response to their argument and their response to our argument.

An indispensable ingredient of the theaters' argument is that their product or service is non-captioned movies. That argument was successful in the Harkins case from Arizona, but was ridiculed by the NInth Circuit Court of Appeals at oral argument in January.
 

Moreover, Harkins and the other movie-captioning cases have all been decided under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which some court have interpreted as mandating only physical access. But ADA yields to any state law or local ordinance that offers more protections to the disabled than ADA, and we have brought our case solely under Washington's Law against Discrimination.
 

Our state LAD contains a number of provisions that we think are uniquely helpful. First, our state law specifically states that when treating us like the general public does not afford us "full enjoyment" of a business' services, the business must offer "reasonable accommodations." We think it is abundantly clear that we don't fully enjoy a movie when we can't understand the dialogue, triggering the requirement for "reasonable accommodation."

Washington state law defines "reasonable accommodation" as those steps "reasonably possible in the circumstances" to make the business "accessible." And the regulations define "accessible" as "usable or understandable." Because "accessible" mean "understandable," we think our state law guarantees us not just physical access, but aural access as well.
 

Defendants in our case are Regal and AMC, both of which operate a number of multiplex theaters in King County, Landmark, which operates the Metro multiplex in Seattle's University area, Cinemark, which operates the Century Federal Way multiplex, and Lincoln Square, which operates a multiplex in Bellevue.
 

Regal shows some open-captioned movies at some but not all of its multiplexes, and we believe it is reasonably possible for them to show captioned movies at all of its complexes, and to show the captioned movies at reasonable times instead of the present practice of showing either early matinees or late-night showings, especially on weekends.
 

AMC shows closed-captioned movies at two of its King County complexes, but frequently doesn't use the full capacity that does exist. We think it is reasonably possible for AMC to equip all of its multiplexes to show captioned films.
 

Cinemark shows occasional second-run captioned films on mid-week days. We think it is reasonably possible for them to show first-run captioned films, and to add weekend showings. Landmark and Lincoln Square show no captioned films, and we think it is reasonably possible for them to start doing so.
 

Originally scheduled for March but postponed due to a scheduling conflict with one of the defense attorneys, the oral argument will take place at 9 a.m. on Friday, April 16 in the King County courthouse in downtown Seattle. The judge is the Hon. Regina Cahan. The argument will be open to the public, and I will try to arrange CART real-time captioning for my use and for the use of any spectators with hearing loss.