# Durango businesses hit with ADA lawsuits



## mark handler (May 6, 2016)

Durango businesses hit with ADA lawsuits
Florida man called ‘serial plaintiff’ by local lawyer
http://www.durangoherald.com/articl...d.js/Durango-businesses-hit-with-ADA-lawsuits
Florida man has filed dozens of lawsuits against small businesses across Colorado, including several in Durango, alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Santiago Abreu is a self-identified “tester” for ADA compliance, according to the dozens of federal lawsuits he has filed since July 2015 in Colorado. But some say Abreu’s efforts are an attempt to extort money from small businesses because he quickly offers to settle for cash.

Local businesses that have been sued include Orio’s Roadhouse, College Drive Cafe, Grassburger, Home Slice Pizza, General Palmer and DoubleTree Hotel.

“It’s horrible, it’s gut-wrenching, it’s disgusting that somebody would act that way,” said Aaron Seitz, owner of College Drive Cafe, who settled his lawsuit. “But I think it’s the way our government works as far as ADA code.”

Abreu apparently visited Durango in August and again in March. During his visits, he went into numerous businesses, apparently taking note of alleged ADA violations, including bathroom counters and soap dispensers that sit too high; grab bars that have improper length or spacing; and insufficient door, aisles or floor space for maneuvering.

Instead of notifying business owners about his concerns, he filed federal lawsuits against them, said Marla C. Underell, a Durango lawyer representing Orio’s Roadhouse. He’s using law firms in Colorado, Arizona and Florida to file complaints.

Underell characterized Abreu as a “serial plaintiff.”

She has contacted the federal court in Colorado to notify it of “related cases,” in which a common party and law firms file serial lawsuits. Underell and her clients, Rob and Heidi Orio, owners of Orio’s Roadhouse, are considering a counterclaim against Abreu for abuse of process. They also have notified the FBI and Colorado Attorney General’s Office.

“It’s really using the legal system in a manner for which the legal system was not intended,” Underell said. “For instance, here, to extract attorney fees rather than remedy all the wrongs.”

The Colorado attorney general said Monday that plaintiffs can sue under Title III of the ADA without exhausting administrative remedies. “Unfortunately, businesses don’t have many options, other than to try to ensure ADA compliance and fight the lawsuits,” Erin Lamb, spokeswoman for the attorney general in Denver, wrote in an email to the Herald.

Legislation has been introduced in California and at the federal level to address abuses. A bill in California, where a disabled attorney has sued thousands of small businesses, would give businesses 90 days after notification to come into compliance and target “high-frequency litigations,” according to The Mercury News.

Abreu is from Palm Beach County, Florida, and apparently visits Colorado for “certain medical treatments” that are not available in Florida, according to one of his complaints. In addition to Durango, he’s filed lawsuits against small businesses in Breckenridge and Telluride.

One of Abreu’s attorneys, Jack S. Kallus of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, declined to comment for this story. Another of his attorneys, Afshin Afsharimehr of Phoenix, said he would communicate by email, but did not return an email seeking comment.

“They’re suing small local businesses, which don’t have a ton of extra cash lying around, and then they’re making these allegations that concern people, because if they do prevail in federal court, there’s an attorney’s fees cost provision,” Underell said. “But instead of following it through on the merits, they’re immediately offering to settle it. It’s dirty.”

Underell encouraged businesses to look at 1991 and 2001 ADA guidelines and consult a contractor or architect who is knowledgeable with ADA standards to see if they need to make retrofits.

The ADA is a civil rights law passed by Congress in 1990 to protect against discrimination based on disabilities. Part of the law requires businesses to provide reasonable public accessibility to products, services and facilities.

Businesses aren’t generally required to make hundreds of thousands of dollars in alterations to become compliant, Underell said. And a grandfather provision can protect businesses from making major alterations until they do a remodel or undergo a use change, she said.

Jason Ragsdale, program manager at Southwest Center for Independence and a member of Durango’s Accessible Communities Team, which advocates for greater accessibility, said “drive-by lawsuits” such as these are occurring nationwide.

“It was really probably just a matter of time before it got to us,” he said. “I don’t think it’s great. The lawsuit thing is never the good way to go about things. I think collaborating with your neighbors is probably a way better way to get things done.”

ACT has tried to head off ADA lawsuits by working with local businesses and educating them about ADA standards, Ragsdale said. The city of Durango has made money available to match half of the improvements businesses make to come into compliance. But so far, businesses have been reluctant to make changes, he said.

“People are afraid that once they get going and change the doorknobs, we’ll be back and we’re going to ask them to change something else,” he said. “There has been some hesitancy, but we’re hoping to change that this year.”

shane@durangoherald.com
An earlier version of this story erred in reporting The Bookcase & Barber (Speakeasy) had been sued. A business by the name of SM Speakeasy, Inc., in Denver was sued.


----------



## north star (May 6, 2016)

*~ ~ & ~ ~*



> *" The ADA is a civil rights law passed by Congress in 1990 to protect against*
> *discrimination based on disabilities. Part of the law requires businesses to provide*
> *reasonable public accessibility to products, services and facilities. *"


I guess that the fact that some of the businesses that are being sued
have had a free "non-compliance" ride for 26+ years wasn't mentioned
by the defendant's attorney huh ?

*~ ~ & ~ ~*


----------



## conarb (May 7, 2016)

north star said:


> *~ ~ & ~ ~*
> 
> I guess that the fact that some of the businesses that are being sued
> have had a free "non-compliance" ride for 26+ years wasn't mentioned
> ...



So what?  The first I heard of this crazy law was in the newspaper, a Chinese restaurant named the Silver Dragon in Oakland's Chinatown built a new restaurant designed like a Buddhist temple, with many steps going up to it, somebody in a wheelchair sued within the first month it was open.  It was immediately seized by local newspaper columnists as the most absurd thing imaginable, nobody could believe that there could be such an unreasonable law and that's still the case, most people don't know about it and can't believe such a law exists.


----------



## north star (May 7, 2016)

*~ ~ $ ~ ~*


If someone is going to be in business, it is their responsibility
to know the laws...........It is, or should be part of their business
model.


*~ ~ $ ~ ~*


----------



## conarb (May 7, 2016)

north star said:


> *~ ~ $ ~ ~*
> 
> 
> If someone is going to be in business, it is their responsibility
> ...



Let's face it, nobody can know the vast number or laws, regulations, and codes out there, especially when these regulations are unconstitutional, this started when LBJ passed the civil rights laws supposedly as redress for past grievances suffered by blacks, then feminists, the handicapped, and others jumped on the bandwagon saying they had been discriminated against as well, Justice Brennen let it stand on a temporary basis because of "a compelling interest in combating racism", the supposed injustices suffered by the handicapped have nothing to do with racism.

There are two developments centered around Harvard now, a few years ago several groups of Asians sued Harvard for discriminating against them in order to admit more blacks, American Indians, and Hispanics, giving special privileges to the handicapped hurts others, just like giving special privileges blacks hurts others.  Just the other day the President of Harvard decreed that there would be no more social clubs like fraternities, sororities, and other clubs, some are going to sue:



			
				New York Times said:
			
		

> Richard T. Porteus, a member of the Harvard Class of 1978 and graduate president of one of the final clubs, the Fly Club, said preliminary discussions were underway with lawyers to challenge the new rules under the theory that they infringe on the right to free association. ¹



We have lost our First Amendment Right of Freedom of Association, it was one thing to force a restaurant to serve a black man for a limited amount of time, but it's quite another to force that same restaurant to serve a handicapped man if it costs lots of money to accommodate him, that restaurant has a first amendment right to say to the guy in the wheelchair: "I don't serve people in wheelchairs", it is not an undue burden to serve a black man even if you don't want to associate with him, but it is an undue burden to serve a handicapped man if you have to spend money to serve him, you should be able to say: "Sorry, we don't serve people who can't get in the door"   Remember the signs up at most businesses: "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone".

I think a comment to the New York Times article relevant and pertinent:



			
				New York Times (comments said:
			
		

> This is nothing more than the "out-group" (President Faust and Dr Khurana as spurred on by the student LGTB, Women's and general Leftist organizations) striving to chop the "in-group" (Final club members, white males and the associated white female "privileged" class) down to size. White females are next on the hate list in case you hadn't noticed.
> 
> Never mind that these people's families have likely supported Harvard for generations and the out-group members are all living off the endowments created by them. *It's us vs. them with with the formerly marginal groups striving to take ownership of something they didn't earn and have no part in.*
> 
> ...




¹ http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/07/us/harvard-restrictions-could-reshape-exclusive-student-clubs.html


----------

