91视频

Businesses across the state received a wake-up call last month after a Eugene convenience store was slapped with a $60,000 penalty by the state after the Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries found that the store illegally banned service dogs from the premises. The story should serve as a warning to all business owners who open their doors to the public that they need to learn, understand and apply some very strict and unforgiving rules regarding service animals.

Michel Hilt-Hayden, a woman living in Eugene, each day has to battle through a number of physical and mental impairments. She has a visual impairment that limits her sight to only 6 to 10 feet and robs her of her depth perception; she also has a hearing impairment that requires her to wear a hearing aid. She was also diagnosed as mentally ill when she was a teenager, with PTSD, agoraphobia and schizophrenia. Her mental conditions sometimes result in debilitating panic attacks.

In order to assist with daily living functions and provide care in emergencies, Hilt-Hayden trained one of her dogs (鈥淧anda鈥�) to perform tasks for her, including chest compressions during panic attacks and visual guidance outdoors. Panda was trained in 2007, but due to advancing age and declining physical condition, became unable to provide full-time care starting in 2011.

At that point, Hilt-Hayden acquired another dog (鈥淐ontessa鈥�) for the purpose of training it into a service animal. By 2012 Contessa was also living with Hilt-Hayden and Panda and providing services. Contessa continued to be trained into the service animal role, and therefore Hilt-Hayden often took both Panda and Contessa with her on excursions so that the younger dog could learn by example.

During one such excursion, on April 17, 2013, Hilt-Hayden walked into the Duck Stop Market with both Panda and Contessa in order to buy milk. According to the case’s Final Order, a store clerk confronted Hilt-Hayden and told her that dogs 鈥� including service dogs 鈥� were not allowed in the store, and suggested that she use the drive-up window. The clerk then wrote in the daily store log that she told the customer that no dogs were allowed and that Hilt-Hayden was 鈥渘ot happy 鈥� TOO BAD!鈥�

The next day Hilt-Hayden attempted to return with only Contessa, but this time was physically blocked from entering by a clerk, who told her 鈥淵ou’re not welcome here; your dog needs to leave.鈥� Police responded to a call, calmed the situation down and suggested that Hilt-Hayden talk to the store owner.

The following day Hilt-Hayden had an amicable conversation with the store owner, and eventually the owner told her she would be allowed in the store only if she was accompanied by one single service dog, and not both.

Hilt-Hayden was not satisfied with that decision and initiated a disability discrimination claim with BOLI. The market’s main defense to the charge was that Contessa was not truly a 鈥渟ervice animal鈥� under Oregon law because her training was not complete. After a four-day hearing, the agency issued a 62-page ruling on Nov. 6, finding that Duck Stop Market discriminated against Hilt-Hayden, rejecting the business’ defense, and awarding Hilt-Hayden $60,000 to compensate her for the emotional trauma she sustained during her encounters.

Most business owners recognize that they have an obligation to accommodate service animals; many have signs on their front doors welcoming service animals even if there is an express 鈥渘o dogs allowed鈥� policy. Where some businesses are confused, however, is where they can draw the line. What exactly is a service dog? How would we know if the animal is a pet or a service animal? What can we do if we are uncertain about the situation? This case and the Final Order issued provide some helpful tips for all businesses that may have to deal with such situations.

First and foremost, there are very strict rules about what one can ask animals’ owners when they enter a business. One can begin by asking if the animal is a 鈥渟ervice animal.鈥� If the person says no, then a business owner has every right to exclude it. If the answer is yes, one can follow up by asking what duties the service animal performs for them (unless it is patently obvious, such as a blind person with a seeing-eye dog). That’s it.

People aren’t allowed to have the individual perform a demonstration (especially if the service dog is trained to respond to some medical emergency). Also, a business owner can’t require the animal to wear a special vest 鈥� although many might have such gear, it is not required under the law. Also, one can’t ask to see special certifications or training licenses, because some animals may be 鈥渢rained鈥� at home and not have such documentation.

Therefore, in most situations, if the person provides adequate responses to the above questions, the best course of action is to allow them on the premises. One can monitor to make sure the animal stays in control and does not act in a disruptive manner (barking, snarling, engaging with other customers or staff, making an unnecessary mess). And if the animal becomes disruptive one can ask its owner to leave. Beyond that, businesses ought to welcome service animals and the customers who accompany them, recognizing that it is good business (and the law) to accommodate them.

Rich Meneghello is a partner in the Portland office of Fisher & Phillips LLP, which is dedicated to representing the interests of management. Contact him at or 503-205-8044, or follow him on Twitter 鈥� @pdxLaborLawyer.