• Welcome to The Building Code Forum

    Your premier resource for building code knowledge.

    This forum remains free to the public thanks to the generous support of our Sawhorse Members and Corporate Sponsors. Their contributions help keep this community thriving and accessible.

    Want enhanced access to expert discussions and exclusive features? Learn more about the benefits here.

    Ready to upgrade? Log in and upgrade now.

Disabled Folsom bar owner target of ADA compliance lawsuit

mark handler

SAWHORSE
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
11,892
Location
So. CA
Disabled Folsom bar owner target of ADA compliance lawsuit

8/29/12

By Penne Usher, Telegraph Correspondent

http://folsomtelegraph.com/detail/216927.html

FOLSOM, CA - A Carmichael attorney, well known in the region for filing lawsuits against small businesses related to disability access, has recently targeted Cameron Park and Folsom businesses.

Scott Johnson, himself confined to a wheelchair, has filed more than 2,000 suits in the past few years, citing inaccessibility to businesses and their restrooms among other things.

Johnson said his civil rights have been violated by not being able to access the targeted businesses.

City Slickers bar on Natoma Street in Folsom is one of the more recent businesses to face Johnson and the potential for a lawsuit.

Johnson, a quadriplegic with “extremely limited use” of his arms, said he visits every establishment prior to serving them a letter or suing, but doesn’t always go inside.

“If they don’t have ramps, I don’t go inside,” he said in a recent phone interview. “If it’s parking and restrooms and things that I’m not able to get into when I visit, my assistant will go in and take pictures.”

That appears to be the case at City Slickers.

Dennis Dority, owner of the local watering hole who has to use a wheelchair to get around, said Johnson was never in his bar.

Dennis Dority, owner of City Clickers in Folsom, is just one of thousands targeted by attorney Scott Johnson who has filed thousands of suits claiming inaccessibility or other violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

1346163528_6090.jpg


“(Johnson) never came in here,” he said. “He just sends people around.”

Dority has no trouble navigating the ramps out front of the bar. He acknowledges the incline is too steep and those repairs will be made. Johnson also reportedly had a problem with the restrooms that are about four-inches to narrow.

“These are just code violations,” Dority said. “When he claims a violation of his civil rights, that is the legal issue.”

Dority’s landlord settled out of court with Johnson paying him an undisclosed amount of money.

Johnson, who has filed similar suits in Placer, Stanislaus, Sacramento and Solano counties, said he’s making business owners aware of accessibility issues and that they need to bring their establishments into compliance with Federal Americans with Disability Act standards.

“Before I file suit, I send a letter and the ADA small business guide — giving them plenty of opportunity (three months) to comply with the law,” he said. “Anybody who responds to the letter (as soon as possible), gets all the time they need to make the repairs — as long as it’s reasonable. They don’t get sued and don’t pay me a penny.”

In November 2011, Rep. Dan Lungren introduced legislation targeting lawsuit abuse regarding ADA compliance issues.

“We wanted to begin the debate and begin the discussion,” Lungren said. “The first purpose was to get a hearing so we could show this wasn’t a radical idea and it was a common sense approach.”

He said his proposed bill is on hold for the remainder of the year.

“The time is limited in this presidential election year,” he said. “(House Resolution 4, the repeal of 1099 requirements in health care reform) took over a year (to pass). You have to build support for it. My hope for next year is to come out quickly on this.”

Lungren said it’s ironic when a business owner with disabilities (such as Dority) is targeted by an ADA-compliance lawsuit.

“The irony is someone who is disabled and making a go of it to build a business that is sued for not making their businesses accessible to the disabled, is amazing,” he said.

A group targeting lawsuit abuse stands behind the legislation, dubbed H.R. 3356, otherwise known as the ACCESS Act (ADA Compliance for Customer Entry to Stores and Services). The bill would require a reasonable time frame for businesses to make necessary repairs to be in compliance.

“Abusive ADA lawsuits do nothing to improve access for the disabled; they merely line the pockets of the lawyers who file them, thereby taking away jobs and tax revenue,” said Tom Scott, executive director of California Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse. “By establishing a short window of time for businesses to fix alleged ADA violations without legal action, we can help rid our courts of lawsuits motivated by greed and instead focus on ensuring that customers have a safe and comfortable experience while frequenting businesses in our communities.”

Editor Don Chaddock contributed to this report. Penne Usher can be reached at penne.usher@gmail.com.
 
It seems like in this case Mr. Johnson did of the new law would require (if he did what he says he did). Thus it seems like a follow-up lawsuit was extremely justified! In addition the owner of the business being handicapped should have known the requirements and informed the landlord that his building was not in compliance. Sounds like in this case the lawsuit is justified in the building owner and business owner are at fault.
 
In addition the owner of the business being handicapped should have known the requirements
The majority of handicap people do not know the details of ramp slope, handrail requirements, clearance spaces, Heck a lot of design professional don't know either

I get calls asking why a recently completed project do not have power doors at the entrance, People just do not know.
 
Msradell said:
It seems like in this case Mr. Johnson did of the new law would require (if he did what he says he did). Thus it seems like a follow-up lawsuit was extremely justified! In addition the owner of the business being handicapped should have known the requirements and informed the landlord that his building was not in compliance. Sounds like in this case the lawsuit is justified in the building owner and business owner are at fault.
How in the world could a drive by be justified. This person has probably never had any intentions of ever using any of the establishments that he has sued. it is an easy lame and disgusting way to make a living.

Perhaps he will experience a flat tire on his wheel chair in a crosswalk during rush hour.
 
Not stated but the fact that the owner of the business, who is in a wheel chair, can make use of the facilities suggests that the facility is reasonably accessible even if it may violate the letter of the law.

I would think that the enforcement focus would be better directed to those facilities that have real barriers.
 
Nice - People like this make a good concept a bad tatse of medicine..... Nothing makes htis society go round like a little entittlement. Thank god World War II happened when it did and people did the best they could do with what they had, Not using Uncle Sam to give them handouts and be the strong arm for lawsuits and settlements.

Karma is a son of a gun, I am sure that he will get what he dishes out.
 
Back
Top