Avoiding & Defending the Expanding Field of ADA Claims


CLE Credits earned: 2 GEN

Overview of operational considerations, risks and best practices with regard to Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 in the context of public accommodations. Program will include physical access issues, litigation risks and response strategies, and websites and communicative channels.

Key topics to be discussed:

•   Overview of the ADA
•   Litigation trends and response tactics
•   Developments and predictions

Date / Time: August 7, 2018

•   2:00 pm – 4:00 pm Eastern
•   1:00 pm – 3:00 pm Central
•   12:00 pm – 2:00 pm Mountain
•   11:00 am – 1:00 pm Pacific

Choose a format:

•   Live Video Broadcast/Re-Broadcast:Watch Program “live” in real-time, must sign-in and watch program on date and time set above. May ask questions during presentation via chat box. Qualifies for “live” CLE credit.
•   On-Demand Video:Access CLE 24/7 via on-demand library and watch program anytime. Qualifies for self-study CLE credit. On-demand versions are made available 7 business days after the original recording date and are view-able for up to one year.

Select your state to see if this class is approved for CLE credit.

Choose the format you want.


Original Broadcast Date: June 20, 2018

Matthew Kenefick, Esq.

Matt’s law practice extends to litigation, compliance and real estate matters. Matt represents a variety of industries including manufacturers, financial institutions, retailers, real estate developers, and the hotel industry, among others.

Representative Experience
•   Representation of Plaintiff venture capital fund in an extended jury trial, lasting 30 trial days, involving a breach of contract claim against a semiconductor corporation and fraudulent transfer claims against more than twenty defendants. Result: verdict in favor of client for more than $4.5 million on the breach of contract claim and more than
$9.2 million on the fraudulent transfer claims. Matt also successfully defended the verdict on appeal and enforced the resulting judgment, collecting all amounts owed.
•   Defense of $77.5 million breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit, through a month long jury trial. Result: verdict in favor of client.
•   Defense of defamation and breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit arising from client’s role as a whistleblower in an alleged affinity based “Ponzi” scheme. Result: dismissal of lawsuit with prejudice following successful anti-SLAPP motion, including recovery of significant amount of attorneys’ fees for client.
•   Defense, through appeal, of complex fraudulent transfer, successor liability, and alter-ego action through trial. Result: defense verdict in favor of client that was upheld on appeal.
•   High value judgment enforcement matters

•   Supply chain, corporate social responsibility and responsible sourcing advice and guidance.
•   Product compliance advice and guidance, including Proposition 65, labelling and safety.
•   Performing enterprise-wide gap analysis of operational compliance matters.
•   Change management, internal campaigning, and policy, procedure and practice development.
•   Responding to Department of Justice, District Attorney and Attorney General investigatory proceedings.
•   Providing retail operational compliance guidance and counseling.
•   Physical access litigation, counseling and infrastructure guidance.
•   Conducting internal investigations involving sensitive and highly confidential subject matter.
•   Counseling clients on disabled access technology and compliance, including policy development and website accessibility.
•   Counseling clients on Electronically Stored Information collection, preservation, processing and production.

Real Estate
•   Defense, through appeal, of developer from challenge to grant of land use entitlement for substantial San Francisco condominium project. Result: obtained judgment in favor of client that was upheld on appeal.
•   Prosecution and defense of complex commercial leasing lawsuits, including lease term extension, restricted use, and return condition disputes.
•   Representation of well-known lenders in complex commercial foreclosure, receivership, and guaranty actions.
•   Representation of prominent entities in defense of disability access lawsuits.
•   Negotiation and drafting of commercial leasing agreements.
•   Administrative law and land-use proceedings.

Matt is from the San Francisco Bay Area, growing up in Los Gatos. Prior to becoming a lawyer, Matt worked his way through college in heavy equipment. Matt is a proud father and in his spare time, Matt enjoys spending time with his family, travel, golf, outdoors and wildlife photography. Prior to joining JMBM, Matt performed volunteer legal work at Legal Advocates for Children and Youth, East San Jose Community Law Center, and the Santa Clara County Public Defender’s Office.

•   J.D., Santa Clara University School of Law, 2003
•   B.A., San Jose State University, 1999

•   Litigation
•   ADA Compliance and Defense
•   Creditors’ Rights
•   Real Estate
•   Real Estate Litigation
•   Labor & Employment
•   Prevailing Wage
•   Trust & Estate Litigation

Accreditation Policy
myLawCLE seeks accreditation for all programs in all states. (Accreditation for paralegals sought thru NALA and NFPA paralegal associations.) Each attending attorney/paralegal will receive a certificate of completion following the close of the CLE program as proof of attendance. In required states, myLawCLE records attorney/paralegals attendance, in all other states attorney/paralegal is provided with the approved CLE certificate to submit to their state bar or governing association.

Automatic MCLE Approvals
All myLawCLE CLE programs are accredited automatically either directly or via reciprocity in the following states: AK, AR, CA, CT, FL, HI, ME, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, NJ, NY, WV, and VT. (AZ does not approve CLE programs, but accepts our certificates for CLE credit.)

Applied MCLE Approvals
myLawCLE seeks approval via application in all other states that are not automatically approved through myLawCLE’s state accreditation. (Some states may take up to 4 weeks to send in final accreditation, however attendees will receive accreditation according to the date the class was taken—the state of VA may take up to 12 weeks.)

Accreditation on Formats: Live Video Broadcasts, “Live” Re-Broadcasts and On-Demand CLEs

Live Video Broadcasts
Live video broadcasts are new live CLE programs being streamed and recorded for the first time. All of these programs qualify for “Live” CLE credit in all states except NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, and LA —these states require in-person attendance to qualify for “Live” CLE credit.

“Live” Re-Broadcasts
“Live” Re-broadcasts are replays of previous recorded CLE programs, set on a specific date and time and where the original presenting speakers calls in live at the end of the event to answer questions. This “live” element allows for “live” Re-broadcast CLEs to qualify for “Live” CLE credits in most states. [The following states DO NOT allow for “live” CLE credits on re-broadcast CLEs: NV, OH, MS, IN, UT, PA, GA, and LA]

On-Demand CLEs
On-demand CLE classes are available 24/7 via the myLawCLE portal. Attendance to these classes is monitored and recorded via our login process and a certificate of completion is issued upon the close of viewing the program. These CLEs can be viewed at anytime and only qualify for self-study CLE credits.

Many states allow for credit to be granted on a 1:1 reciprocal basis for courses approved in another mandatory CLE jurisdiction state. This is known as a reciprocity provision and includes the following states: AK, AR, HI, CT, FL, ME, MO, MT, ND, NH, NM, VT, NJ, NY, and WV. myLawCLE does not seek direct accreditation of live webinars or teleconferences in these states.

myLawCLE Credit Guarantee
Additionally, on all online CLE programs application for approval will be made in all states where attending attorneys are primarily licensed in. If a registered attorney does not receive credit from their state for any reason, a full refund will be granted.

Section I. Legal Background

Section II. How Counsel Can Help
a) Responding to Claims
b) Creating Compliance Programs
c) Creating A Disabled Access Strategy