Vexacious ADA Litigant? -or- Just Another Skumbag Lawyer?

[rubato]

In principle I don't think it is difficult to determine if his motives are honest reformation or mere extortion under color of law.

If his goal is honest reform then he will conduct himself in a way which shows that he does not want to cause harm greater than the benefit to be achieved.


1.
Does he first contact non-complying restaurants with a friendly letter pointing out the deficiencies and offering to meet them to discuss what they might be able to do to remedy the situation? No threats, no demand for payment, no citation of law (showing of the mailed fist) .

2.
Does he treat them with respect and acknowledge that some things might be financially impossible for them? Or that the benefit realized was too small to justify a sacrifice which they had to bear. A business which is minting money is not difficult to distinguish from a barely-getting-by mom and pop operation.

3.
Did he offer to help them pay for retrofits or provide technical means of doing so at reduced cost?


If he did those things then he might claim to be legitimately acting in the public interest.


If he did not do those things then he is a shitheel fucking extortionist asshole and should be treated like one. Treated like a mafia extortionist. Be creative. And proportionate (heh heh heh).


yrs,
rubato

[datsunaholic]

If he were truly working towards achieving compliance with ADA laws, he wouldn't be accepting $5000 "settlements" and dropping the cases. He's simply extorting money, since it's cheaper to pay him off than actually bring old buildings into compliance. Is he using the settlement money to help small businesses reach compliance? No. He's just using it to line his pockets. These lawsuits do nothing to help disabled persons, only him. The shithead should be disbarred.

[kmccune]

This is ridiculous ,these places simply cannot reform,Some good can come of this( very little) reminds me a little bit of that Erin woman who got a little taste of fame and probably money too (actually did a little good ) but when she started trying to stir the pot again on a common problem ,she was ignored.Some of these problems could be fixed by comprimise ,now all schools have to have handicap elevators ,wether there is anyone in a wheelchair or not .
I guess these businesses could have a warning placard or maybe a runner to fetch the wares for the impaired (or they could just go somewhere else) seriously people this country is big trouble. A trouble maker lawyer is not high on my list of good people .

[Sue U]

Guin excepted, you are all gullible as fish and predictably rise to the bait like trout, swallowing hook, line and sinker the outrageous slant of the OP, which might as well have been written by a propagandist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce or some other shill for corporate interests.

First, the lawyer in question is not forcing any business to do what is not ALREADY REQUIRED BY LAW. The businesses he has sued ARE IN VIOLATION and have been skating on compliance (in this case, for decades); they are simply being pressed to MEET EXISTING STANDARDS FOR ACCESSIBILTY. The fact that he is acting as a one-man enforcement division is a function of statutory and governmental structure, which has deliberately left enforcement of the law to private action. Why do you communists hate private enterprise? I guess you'd feel better about it if there were government inspectors doing the same job? Then you could all bitch about "Health & Safety" functionaries like they do in Gobland. Also, it would cost taxpayers a whole lot of money, rather than assessing the costs of enforcement to the violators. Whatever happened to personal responsibility?

Second, because the practice of law can be very complex, especially in regulatory action, lawyers tend to specialize or find "niche" practices once they gain the necessary expertise in a particular field. For example, I would have no idea how to prosecute an ADA compliance case, and if a client ever came to me with one, I'd refer that client to someone who does them on a regular basis. The fact that the OP tries to smear Scott Johnson as a "serial ADA plaintiff" is a cheap way to make it seem like he's doing something wrong by having a "boutique" practice.

Which brings me to Point the Third, which is that a $5k fee per case is not nearly enough return to justify the many many hours of developing the necessary expertise just to handle a one-off case, let alone cover the costs of overhead that come with operating a small business like a law office. And I guarantee you that at a $5k fee per settlement, Scott Johnson is hardly raking in millions. At that rate, you'd have to settle and get paid on one case each and every week just to gross $250k per year -- and that's before paying for support staff, office space, supplies, licensing fees, bar association fees, business taxes, advertising, etc. -- not to mention carrying the litigation expenses of each open case. And closing 50 litigated cases a year is probably an impossibility for a solo practitioner -- it would require an open inventory of three to four times that many files, which is simply too many cases for one person to handle. I couldn't afford to operate my practice, let alone maintain my sanity, on that kind of volume and per-case return. There are a lot easier ways to make a lot more money with a lot less stress.

The entire purpose of the article in the OP -- as borne out by your knee-jerk reactions here -- is to demonize lawyers and litigation against businesses in order to poison public opinion (and hence, the jury pool) by promoting the demonstrably false idea that such claims are somehow frivolous and unfair, brought only to enrich scheming lawyers. That is, in its entirety, a steaming pile of bullshit.

[Guinevere]

[Scooter]

Thanks Sue. The ADA does not provide sufficient incentive for individual plaintiffs to bring suit, or for lawyers to represent them.
This guy has managed to bring together his disability and his legal skills in order to call scofflaws to account, and he is being called an extortionist for his trouble. The irony is rich.

[rubato]

Self-serving twaddle and it ignores the moral arguments. If the harm done is greater than the benefit it is immoral to go after them.


They were operating legal businesses and someone moved the markers to the other side of them, a condition which has made them vulnerable to legal blackmail.


Proof of his dishonest intent is that a letter or telephone call to code enforcement would be just as effective but lacks the $5,000 extortion fee.


yrs,
rubato

[Scooter]

You can call it self-serving twaddle if you wish, but the ADA came around at precisely the right time to protect thousands upon thousands of people living with HIV from unjust discrimination in employment or public accommodation, and it came about just like this, with a handful of HIV+ lawyers and other very dedicated individuals bringing violators to account. You can call the result a bad thing if you wish, but if you oppose initiatives like this, then you oppose any practical way of enforcing compliance with the ADA.

BTW, they aren't legal businesses if they are violating the law.

[Jarlaxle]

Every business violates the law. There are so many rules it isn't 0ossible to comply with all of them.

[Bicycle Bill]

I presume, Sue, that if my mother (in her wheelchair) and I were to have come into your office for a consultation we would have found wheelchair ramps, elevators, and clear aisles and wide access lanes; and if she were to need to use the restroom every sink, stall door, commode, mirror, and safety handrail would be in place and in full and total compliance?

What Jarlaxle said.

-"BB"-

[Scooter]

Every business violates the law. There are so many rules it isn't 0ossible to comply with all of them.

Is that supposed to be an excuse for letting 25 years pass without painting a few new lines in a parking lot, or not spending a few hundred bucks to cut a ramp into a curb to allow a wheelchair to get to the door?

If you are a business that gives half a shit about your customers, you will comply with this law. If you don't, then you deserve to to go out of business after paying whatever fines that can be thrown at you.

[Guinevere]

Perhaps you people should actually educate yourselves in what the ADA does and doesn't do, and how and when and where it applies, before you start spewing drivel about it.

[Guinevere]

Every business violates the law. There are so many rules it isn't 0ossible to comply with all of them.

Is that supposed to be an excuse for letting 25 years pass without painting a few new lines in a parking lot, or not spending a few hundred bucks to cut a ramp into a curb to allow a wheelchair to get to the door?

If you are a business that gives half a shit about your customers, you will comply with this law. If you don't, then you deserve to to go out of business after paying whatever fines that can be thrown at you.

Don't even accept the premise of his point, as it is patently false.


The shit in here keeps getting deeper and deeper.

[Sue U]

I presume, Sue, that if my mother (in her wheelchair) and I were to have come into your office for a consultation we would have found wheelchair ramps, elevators, and clear aisles and wide access lanes; and if she were to need to use the restroom every sink, stall door, commode, mirror, and safety handrail would be in place and in full and total compliance?

Yes, in fact you would. Our building is in full compliance with all accessibility requirements and then some -- and not just because it's the law. Most of the attorneys here deal in personal injury claims and many clients have been disabled by their injuries. It's just good business sense.

[Scooter]

What was that Bill, sorry I couldn't understand you what with your foot jammed so firmly in your mouth.

[Long Run]

The several commercial building projects (new and significant remodels) I have been involved with all included getting sign off from the ADA compliance officer. It is part of the building permit process. Any time you see work being done on a commercial structure, it is clear that there are ADA compliance items included, such as ramps and ramped curbs, etc. With 25+ years of this type of permitting, it should be getting more rare that there would be ADA violations, at least substantive violations. And there is ongoing ADA administration, which presumably is complaint driven. Most people would prefer that substantive issues be dealt with through a regulatory body, rather than having the attorney-enforcement mechanism. This is especially true under the California/Florida attorney-enforcement model where attorneys have added incentives (minimum damages for even the most minor of violations, which increases any settlement value). Under the regulatory enforcement model (funded by fees, not taxes), you have a public employee, with at least some public-feedback and supervisory oversight, who would balance the impact of infractions, the costs of compliance, and the relevant factors in determining how to deal with compliance issues.

[Bicycle Bill]

I imagine that if someone wanted to take the time it wouldn't be too hard to find out just how many suits the honorable(?) Scott Johnson has filed and how many he has settled.  I'm willing to bet he's filed hundreds per year, and settled a damned sight more than one a week for a piddling $5K per settlement.  A little more digging might also turn up just how much he was receiving in settlement monies, as well as how many small businesses shut down or went bankrupt after being on the receiving end of this scumbag's version of the Sicilian Shakedown, whether it was through his own extortionist practices or the cost of making extensive renovations to bring a historic building up to some pettifogging bureaucrat's code.

In addition, you might want to peruse these couple of articles that show us the REAL Scott Johnson.
http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/articl ... /110509912

Since 2004, Johnson has filed more than 1,000 boiler plate lawsuits in Sacramento federal court, slightly tweaking the documents to fit the target: a restaurant 's service counter is too high or an apartment complex doesn't have enough disabled parking.  Just last week, the Carmichael lawyer filed more than two dozen lawsuits, mostly aimed at apartment complexes.

http://www.auburnjournal.com/article/sc ... businesses

Some of the claims in the lawsuit against Johnson align with accounts from Brooks and plaza owner Pete Aroz Sr., who say Johnson never entered the businesses there that he is suing.  Aroz, who owns and operates Pistol Pete’s and the Liquor Outlet, said he has filed a counter-lawsuit against Johnson that is set to go to court in April 2014.

http://www.bizjournals.com/sacramento/n ... rassm.html

Filed in Sacramento County Superior Court on Aug. 17, the suit was filed on behalf of four former employees of his law firm who claim they were forced to undress their boss, put on his swim trunks, carry him to and from a hot tub, dry him, rub lotion on his body and dress him as part of “personal care training” before they started their real job as legal assistants.  When they complained, they were forced out of their jobs, workers allege in the complaint.

I stand by my assessment at the top of this thread.

And if we let this bastard continue to get away with crap like this, here's what we can look forward to:
http://www.overlawyered.com/tag/ada-filing-mills/

[Texas attorney Omar Weaver] Rosales says extending ADA rules to websites will allow him to begin suing companies that use color combinations problematic for the color-blind and layouts that are confusing for people with a limited field of vision.
The DOJ is supporting a National Association of the Deaf lawsuit against Harvard for not subtitling or transcribing videos and audio files posted online.  As such cases multiply, content may be taken offline.

-"BB"-

[Scooter]

So in twelve years he has filed about 1000 suits - less than 100 per year. If average settlement is $5K, that's less than $50,000 per year generated from this, out of which, as Sue said, he has to pay staff, etc.

This is sounding less and less like any sort of cash cow and more like a labour of love.

[Bicycle Bill]

So in twelve years he has filed about 1000 suits - less than 100 per year. If average settlement is $5K, that's less than $50,000 per year generated from this, out of which, as Sue said, he has to pay staff, etc.

This is sounding less and less like any sort of cash cow and more like a labour of love.

First of all, that article was from 2012, so that's an eight year period, not twelve.
Secondly, it says "more than 1000" — how many more than 1000 is anyone's guess.
Thirdly, that's only in Sacramento Federal Court.  How many other federal courts are there in California?

If what Dick the Butcher suggests in Shakespeare's "Henry the Sixth (Part 2)" — "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." — ever comes to pass, this dirtbag deserves to be one of the first ones up against the wall.

-"BB"-

[Scooter]

None of these lawsuits can be filed in county courts. Perhaps if you learned to read...