## Facts

- Lewis “Toby” Tyler, a wheelchair user, was a qualified individual with a disability under Title II of the ADA.
- The City of Manhattan, Kansas, was a public entity subject to Title II and implementing regulations.
- Tyler sought declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief alleging: (1) inadequate ADA self-evaluation and transition plan; (2) denial of equal access to city programs and activities; and (3) discrimination through licensing inaccessible private establishments.
- The City created an ADA committee and produced documents labeled as an ADA self-evaluation and transition plan.
- The self-evaluation substantially reused pre-ADA Rehabilitation Act (§ 504) materials, with limited new content.
- The transition plan identified facilities needing work in general terms but did not detail specific barriers, methods of correction, timelines, or an official responsible for implementation.
- Tyler alleged he was denied meaningful access to city services, including city commission meetings, due in part to a malfunctioning elevator at the meeting site.
- Tyler also alleged inadequate alternative means for receiving public notices and meeting-related information.
- Tyler claimed the City’s licensing of inaccessible liquor stores, taverns, and restaurants constituted discrimination under Title II.
- The City moved for summary judgment; Tyler filed a cross-motion, which the court addressed only in part.

## Issues

1. Whether the City’s ADA self-evaluation and transition plan complied with 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.105 and 35.150(d).
2. Whether the City denied Tyler meaningful access to municipal services, programs, or activities in violation of Title II.
3. Whether the City violated Title II by licensing private businesses whose premises were inaccessible to wheelchair users.
4. Whether Tyler was unlawfully excluded from participating in the City’s ADA self-evaluation and transition-planning process.

## Decision

- The court granted the City’s summary judgment motion in part and denied it in part.
- On the self-evaluation and transition plan claims, the court denied summary judgment for the City, finding genuine disputes of material fact concerning regulatory compliance.
- On program-access claims, the court denied summary judgment in part, including as to whether elevator malfunction and related circumstances effectively excluded Tyler from city commission meetings.
- On the claim that Tyler was excluded from the ADA planning process, the court granted summary judgment for the City because the record showed Tyler attended and participated in committee meetings.
- The court granted summary judgment to the City on certain portions of Tyler’s remaining theories, including aspects of the licensing-based claim, while leaving other questions for further factual development.

## Legal Principles

- Summary judgment is improper where the record shows genuine disputes of material fact regarding ADA compliance and accessibility.
- Title II regulations require a public entity’s self-evaluation to assess and correct noncompliant services, policies, and practices; reliance on outdated § 504 materials may be insufficient where programs and accommodation methods have changed.
- A transition plan for structural changes must identify specific physical obstacles, describe methods of making facilities accessible, provide a schedule for implementation steps, and name the responsible official.
- Title II’s program-access requirement may be violated if architectural barriers or equipment failures deny a person with a disability meaningful access to governmental meetings and activities.
- A claim of exclusion from ADA planning fails where evidence shows the plaintiff was allowed to attend and participate in the planning process.

## Conclusion

The court allowed Tyler’s Title II claims to proceed to trial on whether the City’s ADA self-evaluation and transition plan met regulatory requirements and whether conditions such as a malfunctioning elevator denied him meaningful access to city commission meetings, while rejecting the contention that he was excluded from the City’s ADA planning process and granting the City partial summary judgment on other theories.


Tyler v. City of Manhattan, 849 F. Supp. 1429 (D. Kan. 1994)