•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This Comment first examines the issues presented in Bauer (including the holding that the Americans with Disabilities Act does not protect these volunteers from discrimination) and the court’s rationale for finding that volunteers are not protected under Title III. Part II explores the requirements and differences between Title I and Title III and provides some history of the definitions of “volunteer” and “employee.” Part III presents a public duty thesis arguing that the responsibility of providing accommodations should not belong solely to employers in the context of employees, or public accommodations in the context of patrons, but to all factions of society. This Comment concludes with an exploration in Part IV of the public duty thesis and how such a thesis may work under our current system.

Share

COinS