Plasma Donation Centers Are Service Establishments Subject to the ADA (3rd Cir.)
Retired police officer George Matheis, an individual with diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder, donated plasma on a regular basis at CSL Plasma, Inc.'s plasma donation center. After Matheis brought his psychiatric service animal with him to the center, CSL prevented Matheis from making further plasma donations. CSL cited its safety policy, which categorically barred individuals who use a service animal to manage anxiety or who are prescribed more than two separate anxiety medications. CSL required Matheis to submit a letter from his physician stating that he did not need a service animal before he could continue making donations. Matheis sued CSL under the Americans with Disabilities Act for failure to accommodate his disability.
CSL moved for summary judgment, which was granted by the federal district court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Matheis appealed; CSL cross-appealed the district court's determination that it was subject to the ADA. The Third Circuit reversed and remanded. The court held that the ADA applies to plasma donation centers inasmuch as they are an "other service establishment" under 42 U.S.C. 12181(7)(F) [ https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/12181 ], and accordingly, public accommodations such as CSL must allow individuals with disabilities to use service animals unless a regulatory exception applies. Because CSL failed to provide sufficient evidence to show its service animal policy was based on actual risks and not "speculation, stereotypes, or generalizations," the court said it did not satisfy the regulatory-exception rule and summary judgment in its favor was improper.
Matheis, Jr. v. CSL Plasma, Inc., 2019 WL 4125222 (3rd Cir. Aug. 30, 2019)
https://www2.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/183415p.pdf
Comments