LabCorp v. Davis

LabCorp is a diagnostic testing company that performs laboratory services like blood and urine tests. In a 2016 cost-cutting effort, LabCorp reduced staffing at its patient service centers and introduced self-service kiosks that patients could use to check in, access their information, and perform other functions.

Although a kiosk accessible to blind patients was an option, LabCorp instead chose an inaccessible model. Two legally blind patients, along with the American Council of the Blind, filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court in California under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and a California civil-rights statute. The district court certified two classes of legally blind LabCorp patients who were unable to access the kiosks: a nationwide class for purposes of injunctive relief under the ADA and a California class for purposes of monetary damages under the California statute. The Ninth Circuit affirmed, and LabCorp petitioned for review in the Supreme Court, posing the question whether a federal court may certify a class that contains members who have not suffered any injury.

Serving as co-counsel in the Supreme Court, Public Citizen prepared the plaintiffs’ brief in opposition to the petition. The brief explains that the case does not present the question stated by LabCorp because all class members were denied equal access to LabCorp’s services and, therefore, suffered a cognizable harm. The brief also explains that review of the question is unnecessary because the courts of appeals agree that, for an injunctive relief class, certification may be proper even if some class members cannot show injury and that, for a damages class, the possibility of uninjured class members is relevant to, but not dispositive for, class certification.