mark handler
SAWHORSE
ADA lawsuits: Courting accommodation or cashing in?
http://www.kansas.com/news/local/article101089147.html
Attorney David Calvert specializes in Americans with Disabilities Act discrimination cases. (Sept. 6, 2016) Fernando Salazar The Wichita Eagle
Guadalupe Adams of Winfield has filed 176 lawsuits against businesses in multiple states under the Americans with Disabilities Act – three in Kansas on July 20 alone.
But far from being a publicity-seeking crusader, she’s a mystery to those she has sued.
“I’ve never met her,” said David Calvert, a Wichita attorney who has defended a number of the suits.
Instead, he has dealt exclusively by email and court filings with her attorney, Pete Monismith, who is based in Pittsburgh, Pa.
ADA lawsuits are increasingly common in Kansas and across the country. Critics say the increase is because of people who have made it a cottage industry: Attorneys and handicapped individuals who routinely file suits against businesses, hoping for an easy settlement.
Adams said she files the suits because she is motivated by a desire to help others in her situation. Monismith didn’t return repeated calls seeking comment.
The plaintiffs demand specific physical changes by the businesses – and $5,000 to $10,000 in attorney’s fees.
Critics use the term “drive-by” ADA lawsuits. They contend that such suits are filed by individuals who aren’t patrons of the businesses, but rather people simply looking to extract money.
But the suits are legal and have been since the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in 1990. So far, they have withstood most political efforts to curtail them.
The ADA is the hammer to get businesses to make the changes necessary for the handicapped, proponents say. The businesses sued in these cases are almost always out of compliance in some way.
It’s a practice that leaves Calvert frustrated.
Calvert uses a wheelchair and is known in Wichita as a champion for the disabled. He has sued businesses and governments to improve access. To him, the ADA should be about making businesses more accommodating, rather than extracting money.
“My view is that we can solve a lot of problems just by writing a letter because, unfortunately, some people are not real knowledgeable about the ADA,” he said.
A growth industry
In the first half of 2016, more than 3,400 ADA lawsuits were filed in federal courts across the U.S., an increase of 63 percent from the first six months of the year before, according to the Seyfarth Shaw law firm, a national firm that defends large companies against ADA lawsuits.
In 2013, 2,722 ADA Title III lawsuits were filed the entire year.
The ADA’s Title III applies to private businesses that are accessible to the public, such as motels, shopping centers, stores and restaurants. It provides specific requirements on how to improve accessibility on such items as the number of parking spaces, handicapped signs, angle of the access ramps, seating, door widths, bathroom stall widths and more.
The ADA Title III doesn’t allow the private plaintiffs to collect money. Its only provision is for the business, if it loses or settles, to fix the barriers and pay the plaintiffs’ attorney fees. This is designed to reduce the financial risk for the handicapped to file lawsuits without giving them a financial incentive to do so.
But the law has created an incentive for the attorneys to sue, said Minh Vu, partner and ADA Title III Team Leader for Seyfarth Shaw.
The incidence of handicapped individuals encountering barriers in local businesses should be falling, not rising, she said, because buildings erected after 1992 are required to be compliant with the ADA.
“Over time the world has become a much more accessible place,” she said. “In that sense, it raises perplexing questions about why there are so many lawsuits in the area of accessibility.
“The short answer is more lawyers have discovered an easy way to make money,” she said. “That is the bottom line.”
How it works
Monismith has been Adams’ attorney since 2009.
Despite not returning phone calls seeking comment, he provided some insight into his practices in a lawsuit he filed in 2014 against an ADA consultant whom he accused of poaching some of his clients.
Monismith, who has filed 426 ADA cases since 2010, filed suit against David Pedraza, a Fort Lauderdale, Fla., contractor. Pedraza – who had worked for Monismith in the past – works for both plaintiffs and defendants in ADA cases, identifying non-compliant building features.
In the suit, Monismith accused Pedraza of trying to persuade four of his clients, including Adams – then using her maiden name, Guadalupe Betancourt – to use another attorney.
He said, in the suit, that Pedraza had convinced one of the clients who lived in Michigan to come to Florida and visit properties that Pedraza had identified as having ADA violations. He later tried to convince the client to travel to Texas to visit properties, according to the suit.
Monismith said that Pedraza intended to harm his “means of livelihood” and one of his legal claims in the suit is “tortious interference with a business contract.”
Pedraza said he couldn’t talk about the case, but he isn’t surprised that an industry has arisen to push ADA lawsuits.
“That is how the law was set up and written: There are attorney’s fees awarded,” he said. “If I was an attorney I would be looking for laws that can be enforced with attorneys’ fees awarded.”
‘It’s a joke’
In April 2015, Monismith and Adams sued the owner of the La Quinta Inn on East Kellogg Drive alleging typical ADA shortcomings found in many of the suits.
A partial list of barriers listed in the suit include: The ramp at the handicapped parking spaces is too steep and the spaces are not wide enough for someone in a wheelchair; the pool is inaccessible to someone in wheelchair due to the lack of a pool lift; the slope at the front entrance and the rear entrance is too steep for someone in a wheelchair, and there’s no handicapped parking at the rear of the hotel.
What made this suit different is that the company, SH Hospitality of Scottsdale, Ariz., failed to contest the suit, resulting in the court entering a default judgment against it.
That allowed Monismith to seek attorney’s fees unchallenged. His filing became part of the court record.
In the filing, Monismith said he spent 25.2 hours at $425 per hour to coordinate, research and write the petition and file other motions, plus another two and a half hours of his paralegal’s time at $115 per hour, for $10,997.50 for time spent on the case.
He also sought reimbursement of nearly $1,799 in expenses, including $1,200 for a Florida-based consultant, William Cody, to visit the property and catalog the items out of compliance.
Monismith was awarded the entire $12,796.50.
Except for the list of the actual violation claims, the nine-page petition is virtually identical to all of his other petitions.
continued below
http://www.kansas.com/news/local/article101089147.html
Attorney David Calvert specializes in Americans with Disabilities Act discrimination cases. (Sept. 6, 2016) Fernando Salazar The Wichita Eagle
Guadalupe Adams of Winfield has filed 176 lawsuits against businesses in multiple states under the Americans with Disabilities Act – three in Kansas on July 20 alone.
But far from being a publicity-seeking crusader, she’s a mystery to those she has sued.
“I’ve never met her,” said David Calvert, a Wichita attorney who has defended a number of the suits.
Instead, he has dealt exclusively by email and court filings with her attorney, Pete Monismith, who is based in Pittsburgh, Pa.
ADA lawsuits are increasingly common in Kansas and across the country. Critics say the increase is because of people who have made it a cottage industry: Attorneys and handicapped individuals who routinely file suits against businesses, hoping for an easy settlement.
Adams said she files the suits because she is motivated by a desire to help others in her situation. Monismith didn’t return repeated calls seeking comment.
The plaintiffs demand specific physical changes by the businesses – and $5,000 to $10,000 in attorney’s fees.
Critics use the term “drive-by” ADA lawsuits. They contend that such suits are filed by individuals who aren’t patrons of the businesses, but rather people simply looking to extract money.
But the suits are legal and have been since the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in 1990. So far, they have withstood most political efforts to curtail them.
The ADA is the hammer to get businesses to make the changes necessary for the handicapped, proponents say. The businesses sued in these cases are almost always out of compliance in some way.
It’s a practice that leaves Calvert frustrated.
Calvert uses a wheelchair and is known in Wichita as a champion for the disabled. He has sued businesses and governments to improve access. To him, the ADA should be about making businesses more accommodating, rather than extracting money.
“My view is that we can solve a lot of problems just by writing a letter because, unfortunately, some people are not real knowledgeable about the ADA,” he said.
A growth industry
In the first half of 2016, more than 3,400 ADA lawsuits were filed in federal courts across the U.S., an increase of 63 percent from the first six months of the year before, according to the Seyfarth Shaw law firm, a national firm that defends large companies against ADA lawsuits.
In 2013, 2,722 ADA Title III lawsuits were filed the entire year.
The ADA’s Title III applies to private businesses that are accessible to the public, such as motels, shopping centers, stores and restaurants. It provides specific requirements on how to improve accessibility on such items as the number of parking spaces, handicapped signs, angle of the access ramps, seating, door widths, bathroom stall widths and more.
The ADA Title III doesn’t allow the private plaintiffs to collect money. Its only provision is for the business, if it loses or settles, to fix the barriers and pay the plaintiffs’ attorney fees. This is designed to reduce the financial risk for the handicapped to file lawsuits without giving them a financial incentive to do so.
But the law has created an incentive for the attorneys to sue, said Minh Vu, partner and ADA Title III Team Leader for Seyfarth Shaw.
The incidence of handicapped individuals encountering barriers in local businesses should be falling, not rising, she said, because buildings erected after 1992 are required to be compliant with the ADA.
“Over time the world has become a much more accessible place,” she said. “In that sense, it raises perplexing questions about why there are so many lawsuits in the area of accessibility.
“The short answer is more lawyers have discovered an easy way to make money,” she said. “That is the bottom line.”
How it works
Monismith has been Adams’ attorney since 2009.
Despite not returning phone calls seeking comment, he provided some insight into his practices in a lawsuit he filed in 2014 against an ADA consultant whom he accused of poaching some of his clients.
Monismith, who has filed 426 ADA cases since 2010, filed suit against David Pedraza, a Fort Lauderdale, Fla., contractor. Pedraza – who had worked for Monismith in the past – works for both plaintiffs and defendants in ADA cases, identifying non-compliant building features.
In the suit, Monismith accused Pedraza of trying to persuade four of his clients, including Adams – then using her maiden name, Guadalupe Betancourt – to use another attorney.
He said, in the suit, that Pedraza had convinced one of the clients who lived in Michigan to come to Florida and visit properties that Pedraza had identified as having ADA violations. He later tried to convince the client to travel to Texas to visit properties, according to the suit.
Monismith said that Pedraza intended to harm his “means of livelihood” and one of his legal claims in the suit is “tortious interference with a business contract.”
Pedraza said he couldn’t talk about the case, but he isn’t surprised that an industry has arisen to push ADA lawsuits.
“That is how the law was set up and written: There are attorney’s fees awarded,” he said. “If I was an attorney I would be looking for laws that can be enforced with attorneys’ fees awarded.”
‘It’s a joke’
In April 2015, Monismith and Adams sued the owner of the La Quinta Inn on East Kellogg Drive alleging typical ADA shortcomings found in many of the suits.
A partial list of barriers listed in the suit include: The ramp at the handicapped parking spaces is too steep and the spaces are not wide enough for someone in a wheelchair; the pool is inaccessible to someone in wheelchair due to the lack of a pool lift; the slope at the front entrance and the rear entrance is too steep for someone in a wheelchair, and there’s no handicapped parking at the rear of the hotel.
What made this suit different is that the company, SH Hospitality of Scottsdale, Ariz., failed to contest the suit, resulting in the court entering a default judgment against it.
That allowed Monismith to seek attorney’s fees unchallenged. His filing became part of the court record.
In the filing, Monismith said he spent 25.2 hours at $425 per hour to coordinate, research and write the petition and file other motions, plus another two and a half hours of his paralegal’s time at $115 per hour, for $10,997.50 for time spent on the case.
He also sought reimbursement of nearly $1,799 in expenses, including $1,200 for a Florida-based consultant, William Cody, to visit the property and catalog the items out of compliance.
Monismith was awarded the entire $12,796.50.
Except for the list of the actual violation claims, the nine-page petition is virtually identical to all of his other petitions.
continued below
