Edmunds Family forces the New Orleans Streetcar into full ADA compliance

Oscar Edmunds is Chris Edmunds’ most cherished client, as he happens to be Chris’ son. On February 27, 2025, Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown of the Eastern District of Louisiana signed a consent decree, which forces the New Orleans Regional Transit Authority (RTA) to make its historic streetcar system wheelchair accessible. Oscar’s mom and dad sued back in July 2023, and they obtained a preliminary injunction against the RTA . Now, after a year and a half of litigation, and with the help of attorney Kristen Amond, the RTA has agreed to gradually reach 100% compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The RTA was sued in 2017 by three wheelchair users, and the RTA agreed to make limited updates to the St. Charles line: it added 4 wheelchair-accessible cars to its fleet and renovated 6 stops along the line to provide adequate landing/loading areas for wheelchair users to board. These updates were completed in 2020. But Oscar and his family soon learned how woefully insufficient these changes were, as they were forced to wait for over an hour for an accessible car, as inaccessible cars passed them by. Worse yet, when an accessible car finally arrived, the driver refused to lower the wheelchair lift, insisting that RTA policy prohibited him from doing so, because the stop was not an “ADA stop.” Chris Edmunds confirmed that this was RTA’s policy and demanded that the agency allow Oscar to board at any stop, so long as there was adequate space to deploy the wheelchair lift. The RTA refused, so the Edmunds family filed a lawsuit.

The consent decree signed today has multiple components.

First, immediate scheduling changes have already increased the number of accessible cars running at any given time. Through discovery, Oscar’s family learned that, while the RTA has 4 wheelchair-accessible cars on the St. Charles Avenue line, it was only running one or two of them at any given time, while the other two or three cars sat in the barn gathering dust. That inexplicable policy has come to a stop, and there are now three accessible cars on the line at all times. This change has effectively tripled the number of accessible cars, simply through a scheduling change.

Second, three new wheelchair-accessible cars will be added over the next 15 months. Oscar’s family discovered through the lawsuit that there were three additional wheelchair-accessible cars at the Willow St. barn that were not in active use. These cars merely needed minor repairs and a paint job. Adding these three cars to the line will double the number of wheelchair-accessible cars running on the line (from 3 to 6), and it will mean that every other car that passes by will have a wheelchair lift. Previously, only one out of every 5 or 6 cars had a wheelchair lift.

Third, the consent decree forces the RTA to study and ultimately adopt a plan for a fully accessible fleet (i.e., 100% of cars have a wheelchair lift) by November 3, 2026. The parties will then work together to propose a timeline for implementation of the plan and, if they cannot agree, the court will impose a deadline to make the line 100% accessible.

Fourth, the RTA will renovate over 60 stops to make them ADA compliant. This includes increasing loading space, paving the stops to create a smooth surface for wheelchair use, installing bollards for safety, adding tactile notifications for people with vision impairments, among other improvements. The RTA recently got a $5.3 million grant (which it applied for after the lawsuit was filed) from the FTA under the Infrastructure Bill. Most of the funds will come from this grant.

Fifth, the RTA has updated its mobile app, “Le Pass,” to include real-time location data. Before the lawsuit was filed, the Le Pass did not tell users which approaching cars had a wheelchair lift, leaving wheelchair users guessing at how long their trip would take. Now, wheelchair users can see which cars have a lift before they even leave their house.

Finally, the court has codified the preliminary injunction into a permanent injunction. In plain English, this means that Oscar and his family are free to get on and off at nearly all the stops along the line, regardless of whether those stops have been renovated to full ADA compliance.

The Consent Decree will be monitored by the Court and there will be quarterly status reports with the Court to ensure compliance.  

As the father of the plaintiff in this case, Edmunds brought in Kristen Amond to help handle the case, who he credits with getting the RTA to agree to more sweeping change.

 “This victory isn't just for Oscar and his family — it’s a win for the entire City of New Orleans,” Amond said. “The St. Charles Avenue streetcar is more than just a mode of transportation. It’s a symbol of the city itself. Soon, residents and visitors alike will be able to enjoy one of New Orleans’s most iconic traditions without barriers.”

Read the full Consent Decree here.

Jefferson Parish School Board Spending Over $200,000 in Attorneys Fees to Defend Convicted Child Abuser

Jefferson Parish taxpayers deserve to know how their school board members are spending their money. And it’s not pretty.

Chris Edmunds Law Office represents S.B., a nonverbal 11-year-old girl with autism who was hit by not one, but two of her teachers. These teachers, Janine Rowell and Lesley Nick, were not fired by the Jefferson Parish School Board. Instead, the JPSB quietly transferred them to another school in the district, without telling parents (either at the old school or the new school) the reason for their transfer.

We filed suit in 2021 in federal court. Even though the JPSB has admitted that these two teachers slapped an autistic child (on at least three occasions), it spent nearly $200,000 on attorney’s fees—paying three different law firms—simply to have the suit moved from federal court to state court. To avoid dragging out the case, we attempted settlement discussions numerous times (including at the very beginning), but the JPSB has never offered a dime to settle the matter.

The school board members apparently prefer to use taxpayer funds paying exorbitant legal fees to defense attorneys, rather than compensate victims of child abuse at the hands of its own employees. With the case now in state court, the JPSB is still paying huge legal fees to defense attorneys and still refusing to engage in any settlement talks. So this case appears headed for a jury trial in state court, where we will certainly prevail. That means that on top of the $200,000 already spent on defense lawyers in federal court, the JPSB will be on the hook for a large damages award and attorney’s fees.

The dismissal of the federal claims was wrong, and we continue to challenge that decision. We alleged that these teachers violated the Americans with Disabilities Act because they hit S.B., at least in part, because of her autism. But the federal court refused to allow us to take any evidence. Instead, it dismissed the federal claims because we could not specifically identify other children without disabilities who were treated more favorably. This ruling never made any sense. To this day, no court has ever explained how a nonverbal child could be expected to provide identifying information about her classmates, or how her lawyers could obtain the information without being allowed to take evidence.

But a major development in the case took place earlier this year, one that should send the case back to federal court. In April 2023, Janine Rowell—one of the teachers that hit S.B.—was arrested for hitting other autistic children in a different school system. That’s right: the JBSB’s failure to terminate Rowell’s employment—or take any meaningful action against her—helped Rowell obtain employment in St. Tammany Parish, where, predictably, she continued hitting disabled children. Chris Edmunds Law Office represents these parents in a separate lawsuit against St. Tammany Parish. Most relevant here, we learned that Rowell had made highly offensive and discriminatory comments, including that autistic children “all belong in institutions” and calling our clients “feral children.” In light of this new information from the St. Tammany case, we filed a motion with the federal court to reconsider its decision in the case against Jefferson Parish, because these comments are direct evidence of discriminatory intent—evidence that was impossible to uncover due to the court’s refusal to allow us to take any evidence. Our motion is still pending.

Whether or not the federal claims are revived, the state-law claims (including battery and state-law discrimination claims) are moving forward. On September 19, 2023, Janine Rowell pleaded guilty in St. Tammany Parish court to battery of autistic children. Yet the JPSB is still fighting tooth and nail against the state-court suit, without engaging in any settlement discussions. When it’s all said and done, this case will be a boondoggle for defense attorneys and a massive drain on taxpayer funds—likely in the millions—when the case could have been settled for a small fraction of that years ago.

This all begs the question of whether anyone at the Jefferson Parish School Board is minding the store. All the money wasted on this case—a case with undisputed facts—could have been used to improve services for students across the parish. Indeed, the JPSB recently uprooted the lives of thousands of families by abruptly closing 6 schools, purportedly for financial reasons. In this case, the JPSB could have recognized its employees’ wrongdoing from the beginning and ripped off the bandaid quickly, saving taxpayers hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars. But it has instead decided that paying defense lawyers exorbitant sums and avoiding any accountability for its hiring practices or abusive employees is more important. Even worse, it has been approving these legal fees in secret backdoor meetings, without any input from its constituents.

Chris Edmunds will never stop fighting for children with disabilities. And we will hold the Jefferson Parish School Board accountable in court. In the meantime, perhaps the voters of Jefferson Parish should consider whether another kind of accountability is in order—accountability at the ballot box.

The RTA denies wheelchair users access to wheelchair-accessible streetcars at 90% of the stops along the St. Charles Avenue line

Chris Edmunds Law Office has filed a lawsuit in federal court against the New Orleans Regional Transit Authority (RTA), because it refuses to allow wheelchair users to board at over 90% of the streetcar stops along the St. Charles Avenue line, even if the streetcar has a wheelchair lift. There are 4 streetcar lines in New Orleans, and the St. Charles Avenue line is the only one that is not fully in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Among other things, the suit aims to force the RTA to join the 21st century and make all of its streetcars and all of its stops wheelchair accessible.

See WWL’s coverage of the lawsuit by clicking here, and Fox 8’s coverage of the lawsuit here.

New Orleans Archdiocese agrees to remove discriminatory questions from its admissions applications

A few months after Chris Edmunds Law Office filed a class-action lawsuit against the Archdiocese of New Orleans for its discriminatory admissions applications, the Archdiocese agreed to remove the offending questions. The admissions applications asked prospective students to list any disabilities, in violation of Louisiana law. The Archdiocese later informed the court that it has removed these questions from its applications of the schools it directly operates and has recommended to all other Catholic schools in its territory to do the same. You can read WWL’s coverage of this story here.

Chris Edmunds Law Office frees an Angola inmate from an illegal life sentence

After two years of tireless litigation, Chris Edmunds won the freedom of his client, Joe Washington. Washington—a 68-year-old man from Baton Rouge—was sentenced to life-without-parole in Angola for stealing a bookbag and some Nike shoes from the back of a pickup truck in 2010. The East Baton Rouge DA, Hillar Moore, threw the book at Washington, invoking what is known as the “Habitual Offender” law. The DA reached back all the way to the 1970s to allege that Washington was a repeat offender deserving of life without parole, because he had prior felonies that were punishable by 12 years in prison. But one of the felonies used to enhance his sentence—a 1974 simple burglary—did not qualify under the law, because it was punishable by only 9 years. It wasn’t until 1977 that the Louisiana legislature increased the penalty for simple to 12 years. But the DA, Washington’s attorney, and the judge all missed this obvious mistake in 2011, when Washington was sentenced.

This should have been a simple fix: because his sentence was illegal, he needed to be resentenced. In November 2020, Chris Edmunds Law Office filed a motion to correct Washington’s illegal sentence. But Hillar Moore fought tooth-and-nail to keep the life sentence, offering specious arguments that it was legal. Unfortunately, the trial judge denied the motion—without providing any written reasoning for his decision. The First Circuit Court Court of Appeal did the same, in a two-sentence order that did not address any of the substantive arguments (“Writ Denied”). Finally, justice prevailed on November 16, 2022, when the Louisiana Supreme Court vacated Washington’s sentence, holding that the life-without-parole sentence is “illegal." The high court explained that Washington’s 1974 simple burglary could not be used to enhance his sentence, because simple burglary was not punishable by 12 years “at the time he committed that crime.” You can read the decision here. The Advocate did a story about the protracted legal battle, which you can read here.

Thankfully, the trial judge agreed to promptly resentence Washington the following week, and the DA agreed to withdraw the habitual-offender bill entirely. The judge resentenced to Washington to 8 years (4 less than the maximum for simple burglary). Because he had already served 11, he was released immediately—two days before Thanksgiving. The judge apologized to Joe for how he had been treated, and Joe made it home to his family in time for the holidays.

Class Action Lawsuit against New Orleans Archdiocese for Disability Discrimination

Chris Edmunds Law Office has filed a class-action lawsuit in state court against the Catholic Archdiocese of New Orleans based on the discriminatory questions that Catholic schools ask prospective students about their disabilities. The law in Louisiana prohibits schools from asking any questions in their admissions applications that “elicit[] or attempt[] to elicit information … concerning the disability of an otherwise qualified applicant for admission.” La. Rev. Stat. § 46:2254. But Catholic schools in Louisiana are flagrantly violating the plain text of this statute and using questions in their application forms designed to screen out students with disabilities. For example, Archbishop Shaw High School asks the following questions about prospective students:

• “Has the student used the services of a psychiatrist, psychologist, or other mental healh professional?

• “Please list any pre-existing medical conditions (allergies, diseases, physical or mental disorders, etc.)”

• “Please list any physical limitations.”

• “Please list any learning disabilities.”

• “Please list any medications currently being taken.

Take a look at the questions for yourself:

Another example is Archbishop Rummel High School, which asks in its application application whether a student has “ever been in a resource program” or "has a formal evaluation.”

There is absolutely no reason that schools need to ask these types of questions before making initial admissions decisions. The reason these schools ask these questions is simple: they do not want students with disabilities at their school. Whether children have a physical disability or a learning disability, they deserve the same opportunities as other students. But New Orleans Catholic schools are not following the law, and Chris Edmunds Law Office will hold them accountable and force them to remove these questions from their applications.

One local news outlet, WWL TV, covered the lawsuit. You can watch that story here:

Another news outlet, NOLA.com, also covered the suit: https://www.nola.com/news/courts/article_48706962-1e82-11ed-9017-9fc925a06906.html

Federal Court: Deaf Student's Lawsuit against Ole Miss Can Proceed

US Federal Judge Debra Brown of the Northern District of Mississippi has denied Ole Miss’s motion to dismiss, which sought to dismiss our client’s lawsuit against the university for failing to provide captions for its deaf students. In particular, our client Joshua Sisco repeatedly asked that the university add captions to its social media videos promoting the football team, but Ole Miss refused. Chief Judge Brown held that our client states a valid claim for relief under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, so the case will move forward. You can read the judge’s ruling here.

Federal Judge Allows Suit against St. Martin's Episcopal School To Proceed

Chris Edmunds Law Office represents a young girl with Periventricular Leukomalacia (PVL), who is unable to recall math facts (such as 5 times 5 equals 25). She attended St. Martin’s Episcopal School in Metairie, Louisiana for 8 years, and the school allowed her to use a basic four-function calculator between fourth and sixth grades. However, suddenly and without explanation, the school discontinued this accommodation, even though the school knew that this would cause our client to fail her math class. We filed suit, and St. Martin’s filed a motion to dismiss the case. On February 24, 2022, Judge Lemmon of the Eastern District of Louisiana denied the motion, explaining that the fact that St. Martin’s had previously made “the exact same accommodation” for the prior three years “undermines its argument that the accommodation” is unreasonable. The case will now proceed to discovery.

You can read the order by clicking here.

Deaf student sues Ole Miss for refusing to caption social media videos

Chris Edmunds Law Office represents Joshua Sisco in a lawsuit against the University of Mississippi—more commonly known as “Ole Miss”—for its obstinate refusal to add captions to its social media videos. Mr. Sisco, who was born deaf, is a diehard fan of Ole Miss athletics, especially its football and basketball teams. For the past three years, he has repeatedly asked the school to provide captions for its social media videos, including “The Season,” a reality show following the Ole Miss football team. But the school has refused to caption its videos, leaving Mr. Sisco unable to understand what is being said. Because Ole Miss is a public school, it must comply with Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires that all of its programs and activities be accessible to people with disabilities, including social media videos. And a school that brings in tens of millions of dollars in profit from its football program cannot credibly argue that it lacks the resources to add captions to videos that promote that program. We intend to hold Ole Miss accountable for discriminating against its students and fans who are deaf or hard of hearing.

A deaf-run news station called the Daily Moth has covered the suit here.

And you can read a copy of the lawsuit here.

Lawsuit against Jefferson Parish Schools for physical abuse of autistic students

Chris Edmunds Law Office has filed suit in federal court against the Jefferson Parish Public School System for abuse committed by two of its employees against a student. Our client, an eleven year old girl with autism, has been slapped by not one, but two teachers in the Jefferson Parish Public School System. One of these teachers slapped our client on multiple occasions. Worse yet, neither teacher was discharged—instead, Jefferson Parish simply transferred these employees to different schools, where they will inevitably be educating other children with disabilities.

Corporal punishment has no place in our schools. Chris Edmunds Law Office will bring those responsible to justice and demand that the school system take steps to prevent this from ever happening again. If you discriminate against children with disabilities, Chris Edmunds Law Office will hold you accountable. You can read the lawsuit here.

Mount Carmel Academy to 13 year old wheelchair user: don't bother applying.

Chris Edmunds Law Office has filed suit against Mount Carmel Academy, a large all-girls Catholic high school in New Orleans. We represent a 13 year old girl with cerebral palsy who uses a wheelchair for mobility. After inquiring with the admissions office about attending the school, the girl’s mother (who is a Mount Carmel alumnus) received a voicemail from the school’s President, Sister Camille Anne Campbell. The message stated that “we do not have the accommodations” for a child in a wheelchair, because of the “number of buildings” and “number of floors in the buildings.” This is false: Mount Carmel has elevators in their buildings and can easily accommodate a student in a wheelchair. Worse, Sister Camille Anne told the girl’s mother that the Mount Carmel’s “academic program would be substantially difficult for her,” even though Mount Carmel never saw (or asked for) the child’s grades. In other words, the school assumed that, because the child has a physical disability, the child would struggle academically. This is an offensive assumption, and it’s contradicted by the child’s grades, which are excellent.

WWL TV covered the story, which you can read here:

One unfortunate aspect of WWL’s story is that it gives the impression that Mount Carmel is exempt from federal law. Not so. Though the Americans with Disabilities Act does exempt “religious organizations,” Mount Carmel is not off the hook. Schools that receive federal funds must comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. And wouldn’t you know it? Mount Carmel received between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000 from the Paycheck Protection Program, also known as a “PPP loan.” A federal loan is a contract, with terms and conditions. And one of those conditions is that Mount Carmel cannot discriminate on the basis of disability until it pays off the loan in full. Mount Carmel will be held legally accountable for their actions.

Fortunately, two other news stations, WDSU and WGNO, cleared it up, explaining that Mount Carmel is a recipient of federal funds and therefore cannot discriminate against people with disabilities. You can watch WGNO’s report here and watch WDSU’s report here:

Our client wants all children to have the same opportunities. That’s why we are demanding that Mount Carmel change its policies and undergo remedial training on disability discrimination. Part of the Catholic teaching is that we are all God’s children and that we should protect the most vulnerable people among us. Obviously, Mount Carmel has strayed from that teaching. We’ll see them in court.

Listen to the voicemail below: