# Lawyer gave woman ADA suit targets, ex-boyfriend says



## mark handler (Feb 8, 2015)

Lawyer gave woman ADA suit targets, ex-boyfriend says

BY RAMONA GIWARGISMERCED SUN-STAR

02/07/2015

http://www.modbee.com/news/article9545444.html







Randy Barnes peered into the living room of an Atwater home he shared with his girlfriend last summer and watched as a man handed her a piece of paper.

The paper, according to Barnes, contained the names of businesses that his girlfriend, Aurora Cervantes, would sue in a rash of disability lawsuits. The businesses on the list were “next,” Barnes said in several telephone interviews, even though Cervantes hadn’t stepped foot in most of them.

“I was actually right in the living room when he presented her with a list of all the different businesses that were noncompliant,” Barnes said. “The attorney is feeding her a list of the businesses to sue. He drove from Stockton to Atwater to meet with her.”

Cervantes’ track record of suing businesses for minor violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act is long and still growing.

The 55-year-old, who claims to suffer from lupus and depression, has sued more than 22 businesses in Atwater, Merced and Turlock.

In her lawsuits, which are identical in their wording, she claims improper disability parking and other “barriers” kept her from accessing the businesses and demands cash settlements.

The man with the list of businesses, Barnes said, worked for Daniel Malakauskas, the Stockton-based attorney who represents Cervantes in most of her ADA lawsuits. He’s also the attorney behind a lawsuit that closed the doors of the popular Barnwood Restaurant in Ripon last June.

Malakauskas did not return multiple calls and emails seeking comment.

In an email response to the Sun-Star last year, Malakauskas said he’s filed 55 ADA lawsuits.

He said business owners have had 25 years to comply with the ADA, which was enacted in 1990, but they’ve remained “apathetic” to the rights of the disabled.

“Enough is enough,” Malakauskas wrote. “They say that honey attracts more flies than vinegar, however, unfortunately, in my experience, when it comes to business owners and complying with the ADA, the only thing that motivates them is the fly swatter.”

A Sun-Star investigation linked Barnes to Cervantes through numerous documents and public records, verifying they shared her home on Elm Avenue in Atwater last year. Barnes confirmed being Cervantes’ live-in boyfriend for three months.

Met her on Facebook

Barnes, 57, said he met Cervantes last February through a popular game network on Facebook. Not long after they began chatting on social media, he moved from Florida to be with a woman he thought he was in love with.

But Barnes, who’s also disabled due to a neck injury, said he soon realized Cervantes wasn’t looking for a lover; she was looking for a partner in her endeavors.

“She saw me as a way of doubling her money,” Barnes said. “She recruited me because she saw on Facebook I was disabled. What she wanted to do was double lawsuits.”

Barnes said Cervantes was encouraged to get receipts from businesses whenever possible to legitimize her visits.

The attorneys wanted to expand the lawsuits to Sacramento and Bakersfield, Barnes said, which they called “hot markets” for ADA violations.

Cervantes worried about how the lawsuit settlements would affect her governmental benefits, Barnes said, so a trust fund was established for Cervantes to deposit cash settlements.

When reached for comment Friday, Cervantes answered her phone, but hung up once she learned it was the news media. She did not answer or return subsequent calls.

Despite her lawsuits saying she’s confined to a bed, we found Cervantes sitting in her Atwater front yard last year. During that brief conversation, she told the Sun-Star her legs “give out” and she falls. She declined to answer questions about her lawsuits or cash settlements, saying they’re “confidential” and “there’s more than meets the eye.”

‘It’s just a scheme’

After a couple of months, Barnes said he couldn’t stomach it anymore. He confronted Cervantes about what he believed was a “conspiracy” and “shakedown of businesses.”

It landed him in hot water with one of Cervantes’ roommates, Barnes said, resulting in an altercation that led to Atwater police being called to the home twice in one night.

According to the police report, Barnes told officers on July 22 that he was punched three times by the roommate, knocking him off the home’s front porch. The alleged assault happened after an argument between Barnes and Cervantes, the police report said.

Barnes told the Sun-Star that’s when he decided to move out of Cervantes’ home in Atwater. “I didn’t like what she was doing and I got out of there,” he said.

The string of ADA lawsuits filed by Cervantes was first exposed in a series of stories in the Sun-Star and The Modesto Bee. The bulk of Cervantes’ lawsuits centered in her hometown of Atwater. Some businesses there fought back by distributing a warning flier with her picture on it.

Most business owners told the Sun-Star they couldn’t remember if Cervantes visited their shops. Others said they would have fixed ADA violations if they had been notified prior to being sued.

In Cervantes’ latest round of litigation, Donut King in Merced was sued. Owner Vannak Sao joins the Merced IHOP, Kentucky Fried Chicken, Almond Tree Restaurant in Atwater, Little Caesars, Jack in the Box and others targeted by Cervantes.

“I think the attorneys consult with them to make money out of it – it’s a business,” Sao told the Sun-Star in a recent interview. “It’s just a scheme to get money.”

ADA targeted for change

In the weeks following the newspaper stories about the lawsuits, a number of Central Valley state and federal lawmakers have joined forces to change the ADA law.

Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Turlock, last month co- sponsored a federal bill to give small businesses an opportunity to comply with ADA regulations and protect them from drive-by lawsuits.

“We’ve seen abuses not only in our own community, but across the nation,” Denham said in a previous interview. “We are seeing out-of-state lawyers that are profiting and we’re seeing our local businesses shut down.”

State Sen. Cathleen Galgiani, D-Manteca, recently unveiled Senate Bill 67 to “reduce the profit incentive to file frivolous lawsuits based on minor and technical deficiencies,” she said in a press release.

State Assembly Republican leader Kristin Olsen, of Riverbank and Assemblyman Adam Gray, D-Merced, teamed up in December to introduce legislation that would allow businesses time to fix deficiencies and would reduce damages for violations.

As for Barnes, he left California in August and hasn’t seen his ex-girlfriend since then. Barnes said he hopes that sharing his story will expose how some are taking advantage of the law to line their pockets.

“I’m speaking out to defend the Atwater businesses,” Barnes said. “I don’t think it’s right.”


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 10, 2015)

"they would have fixed if notified" (but wouldn't have otherwise?)


----------



## mjesse (Feb 10, 2015)

ADAguy said:
			
		

> "they would have fixed if notified" (but wouldn't have otherwise?)


Without knowing the specifics of the case, it may not be appropriate to call those _nasty_ business owners negligent.

The article also states many cases were based on "minor and technical deficiencies"

It comes back to the issue of a set of regulations which are difficult to understand for all but the most well versed professionals. If a business is sued for a _minor or technical deficiency,_ a simple notification period could be all that's needed to get compliance.


----------



## kilitact (Feb 10, 2015)

mjesse said:
			
		

> Without knowing the specifics of the case, it may not be appropriate to call those _nasty_ business owners negligent.The article also states many cases were based on "minor and technical deficiencies"
> 
> It comes back to the issue of a set of regulations which are difficult to understand for all but the most well versed professionals. If a business is sued for a _minor or technical deficiency,_ a simple notification period could be all that's needed to get compliance.


California requires notification and minimum time to correct. Why doesn't this information/requirement appear in the article?


----------



## mark handler (Feb 10, 2015)

kilitact said:
			
		

> California requires notification and minimum time to correct. Why doesn't this information/requirement appear in the article?


Not totally correct, refer to the link

http://www.ada-pros.com/highlights-of-the-new-sb-1186-disabled-access-law/


----------



## conarb (Feb 10, 2015)

No matter how many statutes California passes they will have no effect on ADA litigation which is filed in Federal Court, some representatives have now introduced similar legislation in congress.



			
				\ said:
			
		

> Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Turlock, joined more than a dozen legislators in co-sponsoring a federal bill to give small businesses an opportunity to comply with ADA regulations and protect them from drive-by lawsuits.But despite support from state and federal lawmakers to reform the ADA law, it hasn’t stopped one Atwater resident on her path of targeting more than 20 local businesses in ADA lawsuits. Aurora Cervantes, 55, added two more to her roster: the Merced IHOP and Donut King on Jan. 6.
> 
> Read more here: http://www.mercedsunstar.com/news/local/article6589254.html#storylink=cpy


We have a similar situation going on here over medical marijuana federal/state law discrepancies:



			
				\ said:
			
		

> The ruling, by U.S District Judge for Northern California Jon Tigar, means the long-established Berkeley Patients Group, at 2366 San Pablo Ave. south of Bancroft Way, will remain open in the foreseeable future, pending an appeal by the city to be granted standing to participate as an interested party in an action that is not likely to be heard anytime soon."We are hopeful that Congress will act quickly to resolve the split between state and federal marijuana laws," the dispensary's executive director, Tim Schick, said in a news release Monday. "In the meantime," Schick added, "we look forward to continuing to serve our local patient population."
> 
> Proposition 215, approved by California voters in 1996, legalized medical marijuana upon a doctor's recommendation. The federal government, however, considers marijuana an illegal drug.
> 
> ...


¹ http://www.contracostatimes.com/News/ci_27492159/Berkeley-dispensary-gets-reprieve-in-judges-ruling


----------



## kilitact (Feb 11, 2015)

mark handler said:
			
		

> Not totally correct, refer to the linkhttp://www.ada-pros.com/highlights-of-the-new-sb-1186-disabled-access-law/


Appears I'm partially incorrect.

" That your business is a small business with 25 or fewer employees and meets the gross receipts criteria set out in Section 55.56 of the Civil Code, and that all violations giving rise to the claim have been corrected, or will be corrected within 30 days of being served with the complaint."


----------



## mark handler (Feb 11, 2015)

kilitact said:
			
		

> Appears I'm partially incorrect. " That your business is a small business with 25 or fewer employees and meets the gross receipts criteria set out in Section 55.56 of the Civil Code, and that all violations giving rise to the claim have been corrected, or will be corrected within 30 days of being served with the complaint."


That what I said, "Not totally correct"... Maybe I should have added; *BUT, Not totally incorrect*


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 11, 2015)

My previous comment doesn't deserve a response? The duty remains on the business owner tp "know" his/her/ responsibilities.


----------



## Yikes (Feb 11, 2015)

conarb said:
			
		

> No matter how many statutes California passes they will have no effect on ADA litigation which is filed in Federal Court, some representatives have now introduced similar legislation in congress.


ConArb, the thing that our California legislators CAN do is change California's Unruh Civil Rights Act, which allows triple damages and minimum $4000 fine per violation of civil rights.  Attorneys use ADA law as evidence of civil rights violations, then they use the Aunruh Act to extract the money from the property owner.  California accounts for over 40% of ADA lawsuits nationwide.

If the Unruh Act could somehow be amended to diminish the financial incentives to sue, perhaps by providing more alternative corrective procedures in lieu of damages, then even if ADA stayed the same we'd have less lawsuits, and money could properly be directed towards physical compliance rather than towards attorney's pockets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruh_Civil_Rights_Act#Disability_litigation


----------



## mjesse (Feb 11, 2015)

ADAguy said:
			
		

> My previous comment doesn't deserve a response? The duty remains on the business owner tp "know" his/her/ responsibilities.


What's your point?

It's also the owner's responsibility to understand tax laws , which are only slightly more confusing than ADA regs.

When I read your comment (which I replied to) I interpreted it as "they should have known better, so make 'em pay". If that's not what you intended, I apologize.

I've stated before, I'm opposed to the automatic vilification of all business owners as wealthy, profit mongers. The inference that changes are only made if litigation is threatened, does not match reality in my experience.

I've also stated that the regulations are so complex, your average Joe business owner should NOT be expected to understand every nuance. Education and notification should be the leading force, and litigation the last resort for blatant scofflaws.

Who's out there educating business owners about the regulations? How much effort has the Federal Government put toward providing SIMPLE guidelines for small businesses to follow. What are you doing to educate your populace?


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Feb 11, 2015)

ADAguy said:
			
		

> My previous comment doesn't deserve a response? The duty remains on the business owner tp "know" his/her/ responsibilities.


Dude. Trolling for affirmation?

We need to sit down and talk.  

Be comfortable with the last word.

Brent.


----------



## mtlogcabin (Feb 11, 2015)

> _The duty remains on the business owner tp "know" his/her/ responsibilities._


The devil is in the details when it comes to accessibility

A business owner may "know" his business is accessible because he/she has customers with disabilities use his/her establishment regularly with no complaints. Then all of a sudden there is a letter saying the paint striping is faded, the ramps do not comply, the sink is a 1/4" to high. Most design professionals are ignorant of the "details" without a library of code books.


----------



## jdfruit (Feb 12, 2015)

Per the OP article: ...demands cash settlements. ...

Currently it is not allowed per CA law to demand cash settlements. Is the article in error or the attorney(s) not handling the issues properly?

Handler, if more info comes up, please post.


----------



## ADAguy (Feb 12, 2015)

Demands for cash warrant State Bar action in CA.


----------



## mark handler (Feb 12, 2015)

jdfruit said:
			
		

> Handler, if more info comes up, please post.


Jim, I will.


----------

