A disabled Arizona father has initiated a significant federal civil rights lawsuit against the Round Valley Justice Court and Judge Butch Gunnels, alleging serious violations of disability rights and constitutional protections. Joseph Lathus, a mouth cancer survivor with permanent physical impairments, claims he was systematically denied appropriate legal accommodations and subsequently targeted with a retaliatory contempt charge.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, centers on Lathus's experience during a misdemeanor trial where his communication challenges resulting from cancer surgery were inadequately addressed. Despite presenting medical documentation, Lathus was forced to proceed with limited accommodations, including having a court clerk read his handwritten notes.
Following the trial's conclusion and full payment of a $750 fine, Judge Gunnels unexpectedly issued a contempt order months later, challenging Lathus's disability claims without obtaining an expert medical evaluation. The complaint suggests this action was a direct retaliation after Lathus filed an appeal and a separate lawsuit against Apache County.
The federal lawsuit seeks comprehensive relief, including injunctive measures, compensatory and punitive damages, and a jury trial. Critically, the legal action highlights potential systemic failures in disability accommodation within the judicial system, particularly how justice courts assess and respond to individuals with communication impairments.
Legal experts suggest the case could have broader implications for disability rights in judicial proceedings, potentially establishing precedent for how courts must accommodate individuals with communication challenges. The lawsuit specifically alleges violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and constitutional protections under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Lathus has also requested a Department of Justice investigation into potential judicial misconduct, framing the case as more than an individual legal dispute but a challenge to systemic discrimination against disabled individuals within local government systems.
