Thompson case
From Service Dog Training
This is a relatively uncomplicated case that I bring up because of a few key points in the decision. The case involves an incident between a man with a dog and the security staff of the Dover Downs casino.
The basics of the case: The Plaintiff, Thompson, entered the Dover Downs casino with a four month old puppy. The dog was not on a leash and wore a vest fastened by nylon line. As the Plaintiff entered the casino floor, he was stopped by a security guard and informed that pets were not permitted on the casino floor. The Plaintiff stated that he was disabled and that the dog with him was a support dog(=service dog). The security guard did not believe that the dog was a support dog because of his age and the disrepair of his vest and asked about the task training of the dog. The Plaintiff refused to provide this information. Supervisors were called and received the same response from the Plaintiff when they asked about the dog's task training. The Plaintiff referred the security guards to the Department of Justice ADA Hotline. The supervisor called the hotline and was informed that he was well within his rights to ask about the dog's task training and further advised that a four month old dog was not likely to be a trained service dog. The security supervisor returned to the casino floor and advised the Plaintiff that the Department of Justice instructed him that he could ask the question he did and and require an answer as a condition of access. The Plaintiff left and later filed with the Delaware Human Rights Commission.
The Delaware Human Rights Commission ruled in favor of the Plaintiff, but that ruling was overturned by the courts. On appeal the court's decision to overturn the ruling of the Human Rights Commission was confirmed and the case was settled in favor of Dover Downs. The case linked above is to the decision of the appeals court. A few things of note in this case: - Businesses have the right to ask what tasks a service dog has been trained to do. They may also deny access to service dog users who refuse to answer the question. - More notably, a statement in the original court decision seems to indicate that as long as a task is given, business may not deny access.
- "The tasks to be performed by the support animal in his case
- were not readily apparent. Once the disabled person states the tasks
- that the support animal is trained to perform, access must be granted.
- If the disabled person refuses to answer the question, access of the
- disabled person with the animal may be denied."
One of the major concerns among service dog users about the clause in the ADA business brief that allows businesses to ask about task training was the fear that it would be left to the individual businesses to decide if a task was "acceptable" or not. The above statement would seem to give access to any dog user that can provide any one task that their dog is trained to do. It remains the realm of the courts to decide in a disagreement if a dog is a service dog or not based on the trained tasks they have been trained to perform.
