Bummer, dude: Judge says Abercrombie has to pay up

Bummer, dude: Judge says Abercrombie has to pay up

DENVER — Abercrombie & Fitch has spent four-and-a-half years arguing in court that its Hollister teen stores don’t violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Hollister brand is designed to evoke a southern California beach gestalt. Girls find their halter tops in the “Bettys” department. Boys find their ripped jeans in the “Dudes” section. Entrances to hundreds of the surf-themed stores have been built with stairs to resemble weathered porches of beach shacks.

Customers who use wheelchairs and walkers have been unable to access the faux beach houses and told to use side entrances. They sued in an effort to, like, keep it real.

In May, disability rights activists prevailed in U.S. District Court in Denver, where Judge Wiley Daniel ordered the company to remove, ramp or close off all of the elevated door entries by January 2017.

This week, Judge Daniel ordered Abercrombie & Fitch to pay a wad of cash — $405,195 — in attorneys fees and other costs.

The Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition and other plaintiffs are stoked about their bodacious win. Still, they’s hanging tight because the company is appealing the case in U.S. District Court.

Like this story? Steal it! Feel free to republish it in part or in full, just please give credit to The Colorado Independent and add a link to the original.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.



About the Author

Susan Greene

A recovering newspaper journalist and Pulitzer finalist. Her criminal justice reporting includes “Trashing the Truth,” with Miles Moffeit, and “The Gray Box.”
susan@coloradoindependent.com | 720-295-8006 | @greeneindenver

2 Comments

  1. Responding on said:

    Congrats to the Colorado Cross-Disability Coalition. A & F is a rather pompous ass, yuppie store. I give it wide berth whenever I go to Cherry Creek mall.

  2. Valerie Schlecht on said:

    Hollister lost in U.S. District Court. Undeterred, Hollister has appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, where it is attempting to recycle the same tired arguments rejected by the district court in its well-reasoned order.

Leave a Response

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.