Cinema Sounds - Controversies

Controversies

The early versions of stadium-style seating as built in 1995 had auditoriums configured with an entrance to a flat area right in front of the screen for wheelchair-using guests; persons sitting there had to either lean back or look up at an uncomfortable angle to see the screen. Able-bodied guests had to ascend the stairs to sit in the middle of the risers in order to have a comfortable line-of-sight with the screen. Since some wheelchair users may have limited neck movement range, this configuration made AMC a popular target for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuits.

AMC subsequently solved the problem in newer theaters by building full-stadium auditoriums where the main entrance is through a ramp that emerges onto a platform in the middle of the risers, so that wheelchair users can enjoy optimal line-of-sight. However, the U.S. Department of Justice sued the company anyway and obtained an order from federal district judge Florence-Marie Cooper requiring AMC to retrofit over 1,990 screens in 95 multiplexes and megaplexes across the United States. The company successfully appealed the order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which ruled on December 5, 2008, that the order was grossly overboard and violated AMC's due process rights under the Constitution of the United States.

AMC won by pointing out that the United States Access Board, for reasons unknown, had never amended its guidelines for movie theaters to specifically require theaters to provide line-of-sight for wheelchairs that was as good as the best sightlines from the elevated risers, versus merely providing an unobstructed view of the screen. The first time any government agency took that position was when DOJ filed an amicus brief in an unrelated case in 1998. Therefore, it was unfair to AMC to retroactively hold it to a standard which did not even exist at the time it started building stadium-style theaters and which it did not receive proper legal notice of; in contrast, AMC would have received constructive notice under the Administrative Procedure Act if the Access Board had ever bothered to amend its guidelines. The federal district court was ordered to identify the specific date after 1998 when AMC should have reasonably become aware that some agency in the federal government was taking the position at issue, and limit the retrofit order to theaters constructed after that date.