Orleans told to fix hotel room doors

Thursday, Oct. 4, 2001 | 10:38 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- The Orleans hotel-casino in Las Vegas must make changes including widening the doors in more than 800 rooms to accommodate people with disabilities, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday.

The court Wednesday overturned many of the rulings of U.S. Magistrate Judge Roger Hunt in finding that some portions of the Orleans do not comply with the Americans with Disability Act.

"We're very happy," said attorney Richard Armknecht III, who represented two men with disabilities, Roger Long and Ronald Ray Smith, and the Disabled Rights Action Committee in the lawsuit filed four years ago.

Armknecht said, "My understanding is they are going to have to fix these things."

The court did not award any monetary damages to Long, Smith or the committee but ordered the lower court to issue injunctions that the hotel-casino must comply with the federal law in several areas of the hotel-casino. Barry Lieberman, attorney for the Orleans, said he was disappointed and that the changes would cost $800,000.

Options being considered, Lieberman said, include an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court or asking for a re-hearing from the circuit court. But he added, "We may follow the ruling" and make the changes.

The Orleans has 819 of its 829 hotel rooms with bathroom doorways with clear openings smaller than the 32 inches required by the disabilities law. The opening is only 28 inches. Hunt ruled that while the bathroom door width was a technical violation of the guidelines, there had been "substantial compliance with the spirit of the law and no injunction would be issued."

The circuit court, in an opinion written by Judge Michael D. Hawkins, said the position of the Orleans that the ADA guidelines do not apply to bathroom doors "is illogical." Hawkins wrote "It defies logic to think that the intent (of the guidelines) was to allow hotels to render the bedroom inaccessible from part of the guest's bathroom."

The circuit court, writing about Hunt's decision about the casino being in substantial compliance, said there is no room for discretion. "This violation resulted in the very discrimination the statute seeks to prevent. It denied individuals with disabilities access to public accommodations."

The decision also reversed Hunt's findings concerning slot change kiosks but upheld his findings on the swimming pool area and that the plaintiffs were not entitled to monetary damages.

The court sent the case back to Hunt to gather more evidence on whether two of the three bars surrounding the gaming pit complied with the disability standards.