SACRAMENTO, Calif. (CN) — A federal judge is weighing the case of a deaf man who claims that a Six Flags theme park discriminated against him by denying him an American Sign Language interpreter.
In closing arguments before U.S. District Court Chief Judge Kimberly Mueller Thursday, Melvin Patterson argued that the Vallejo theme park wouldn’t provide an interpreter for him after multiple requests in 2021. The park has said that it was an employee mistake that led to a refusal for an interpreter, claiming that Patterson instead was looking for a refund after having buyer’s remorse.
“The evidence was clear — there was no way Mr. Patterson was going to be able to receive an interpreter from Six Flags,” said attorney Reyna Lubin, who represents Patterson.
According to Lubin, Six Flags now points to a changed policy and is hiding behind its corporate structure. She called that maneuver an attempt to evade its duty under the law.
Attorneys on both sides have referenced a seven-day policy the theme park has. People who want an interpreter should contact the park at least seven days before their visit. Attorney Rudie Baldwin, who represents the theme park, argued that Patterson never gave his client that much notice.
Lubin said if the theme park can hide behind that policy, it could make it 50 or 70 days. However, she argued that the park’s employees weren’t aware of that policy. They didn’t have proper training, as one of them told Patterson that the park wouldn’t provide an interpreter for him.
“It’s the park’s responsibility to train its own staff,” Lubin said. “It’s the park’s affirmative duty to provide accommodations to Mr. Patterson.”
Baldwin said the case was about a bad customer service experience Patterson had, as well as about Patterson’s desire to get a refund.
Patterson bought his tickets after 5 p.m. June 4, 2021. He and his family visited the Vallejo park two days later. Patterson had no expectation of receiving an interpreter that day, Baldwin said.
Then, less than a week later, he asked for a refund.
“Plaintiff never tried to actually avail himself of the park’s [American Sign Language] policy before he wants a refund,” Baldwin added.
Instead, he said, Patterson was trying to use the Americans with Disabilities Act as a guise to correct his buyer’s remorse.
Pivoting to Lubin’s argument about the seven-day rule, Baldwin said it’s reasonable. He noted that Disneyland requires two-weeks’ notice.
As for an employee telling Patterson that Six Flags wouldn’t provide an interpreter for him, Baldwin called that a mistake. The park has since changed its policy for requesting an interpreter, offers a phone number and email address for people to contact and ensures that emails go to more than one person.
Baldwin also pointed to discrepancies in Patterson’s testimony. According to Baldwin, Patterson initially denied ever having filed an Americans with Disability Act lawsuit before, though he later remembered having filed one. He also has a history of making complaints to businesses, which he didn’t immediately recollect.
“He was a hammer looking for a nail,” Baldwin said of Patterson’s disposition. “He wants to make a complaint.”
Under questioning from the judge, Lubin said the park’s seven-day rule didn’t need to change. However, it should be a recommendation, not a requirement, and Six Flags should work to provide an interpreter in under that time if possible.
Questioned about a dollar amount for possible punitive damages and emotional distress, Lubin said she’d leave that to the judge.
There is no jury in the case. Mueller — who took the case under submission Thursday — will decide whether to issue a preliminary injunction against the park, requiring it to perform specific training for its employees, and whether Patterson prevailed and will receive any damages.