Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

BMD Obtains Dismissal of ADA Title III Suit Against National Outlet Mall Chain

Client Alert
February 6, 2018

On January 12, 2018, Brennan, Manna & Diamond obtained the dismissal of an Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) lawsuit filed against Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan.

The suit, which was brought under Title III of the ADA, alleged that Tanger’s Byron Center, Michigan outlet mall contained barriers to access in violation of the ADA’s accessibility requirements. The plaintiff demanded prospective injunctive relief, including a retrofit of the entire mall, as well as expert witness and attorneys’ fees.

BMD moved to dismiss the case for lack of standing. Unlike a conventional suit, where a plaintiff seeking monetary damages must show a past injury to possess legal standing, an ADA Title III plaintiff must show a threat of prospective future harm in order to recover. Typically, this means that the plaintiff must plead (and prove) that he or she has reason to continue to visit the public accommodation in question and will continue to be injured by the facility’s alleged non-compliance with the ADA.

In its opinion granting Tanger’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, United States Magistrate Judge Ellen S. Carmody held that the plaintiff’s Amended Complaint failed to adequately plead prospective future injury. In particular, the Court noted that “[v]ague and conclusory allegations that a plaintiff intends to return to a location […] are insufficient to maintain an ADA claim.” Applying this standard to the plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, the Court held that his “vague and conclusory statements regarding his alleged intent to return” to Tanger’s Byron Center property “are insufficient.” On this record, the Court found that the plaintiff “failed to sufficiently allege that he will suffer a future injury in the absence of injunctive relief.”

Recognizing the cost that ADA Title III actions pose to owners and operators of public accommodations, BMD’s experienced team of ADA litigators uses a proactive approach to seek the early and cost-effective resolution of cases before proceeding with expensive expert discovery. BMD was proud to obtain this result for Tanger Factory Outlets, one of the largest and most iconic outlet mall chains in the country.

BMD Partners Christopher Congeni and Daniel Rudary represented Tanger Factory Outlet Centers in this case. The citation for Court’s opinion is Saar v. Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc., W.D. Mich. No. 1:17-cv-41, 2018 WL 387962 (Jan. 12, 2018).

Litigation
Client Alert

Update on Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haiti and Related Countries

July 13, 2026USCIS has temporarily extended Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) for certain Temporary Protected Status (TPS) beneficiaries from Haiti and several other countries following recent court action. Employers and TPS recipients should review EAD expiration dates, monitor ongoing developments, and ensure compliance with Form I-9 and E-Verify requirements.Client Alert

HHS Accessibility Requirements for Medical Diagnostic Equipment: What Health Care Providers Need to Know

July 8, 2026Health care providers that receive federal financial assistance are now subject to updated HHS accessibility requirements for medical diagnostic equipment under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. With the July 8, 2026, compliance deadline in effect, covered providers should ensure they have the required accessible equipment, train staff, and review operational practices to reduce compliance risk and provide accessible care for patients with disabilities.Client Alert

Florida Super Lawyers® Recognizes Brennan Manna Diamond Attorneys to the 2026 Lists

June 26, 2026BRENNAN, MANNA & DIAMOND is proud to announce that three of our attorneys have been designated to the 2026 Florida Super Lawyers® and Florida Rising Stars® lists. Super Lawyers is based on multiple categories of independent research and peer evaluation to identify outstanding lawyers.Client Alert

Supreme Court Clears Path for TPS Terminations: What Employers Need to Know

June 25, 2026The U.S. Supreme Court's June 25, 2026 decision in Mullin v. Doe and Trump v. Miot removed legal obstacles that had delayed the termination of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haiti and Syria. The ruling also reinforces the administration's authority to terminate other TPS designations currently under review. Employers should immediately identify workers whose employment authorization is tied to affected TPS programs, review Form I-9 records, and prepare for forthcoming USCIS guidance before taking any employment action.Client Alert

The Risks of Outsourcing Medical Billing and the Importance of State-Law Compliance

June 24, 2026Offshoring medical billing and other administrative functions can reduce costs, but it also raises significant compliance, operational, and contractual risks. Although HIPAA does not explicitly prohibit protected health information from being accessed or stored outside the United States, healthcare providers and their vendors remain responsible for safeguarding patient information and complying with state-specific restrictions that may limit or prohibit offshore subcontracting.
Older posts