Preview
BRIAN C. ANDREWS, ESQ. (SBN 212969) Electronically FILED by
brian@briancandrews.com Superior Court of California,
County of Los An geles
ANDREWS LAW GROUP 4/25/2024 5:31 PI
6104 Innovation Way David W. Slayton,
Carlsbad, CA 92009 Executive Officer/Clerk of Court,
Phone: (858) 452-5600 By Y. Tarasyuk, Deputy Clerk
Fax: (858) 452-5601
Attorney for Plaintiff,
ROBERT BEST
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES —- STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE
ROBERT BEST, an individual, Case No.: 24ST OY 10466
10 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Plaintiff,
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
11
vs. (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS -
12 DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC
BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual; ACCOMMODATION)
13
WILSHIRE SHATTO CENTER, LLC, a (California Civil Code § 51)
14 California Limited Liability Company; and ACTION SUBJECT TO THE
DOES | to 100, inclusive, SUPPLEMENTAL FEE IN GOVERNMENT)
15 CODE SECTION 70616.5 (Fee Waiver)
Defendants.
16
17
Now Comes Plaintiff ROBERT BEST, by and through attorney Brian C. Andrews, Esq., and
18
alleges as follows:
19
FACTS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION
20
1 The following Complaint is filed by a “high frequency litigant” as defined by Code
21
of Civil Procedure §425.55. Plaintiff
was enjoying a visit to the area on the dates alleged herein and
22 decided to visit the subject business described herein. Plaintiff's purpose for visiting the subject
23 business was to patronize and enjoy the goods and/or services offered at the subject business.
24 2 Plaintiff is exempt from the filing fee required by Government Code §70616.5, as he
25 has met the Court requirements to qualify for a Request to Waive Court Fees (“Fee Waiver’).
26 3 Defendant BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual, is, and at all times alleged herein
27 was, doing business in Los Angeles County, California as “BOB’S CAFE”.
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page | of 7
4 Defendant WILSHIRE SHATTO CENTER, LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company, is, and at all times alleged herein was, an owner and/or landlord of real property in Los
Angeles County, California, located at 3130 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90010 that is
assigned Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number 5077-011-015 (hereinafter “Subject
Property”).
5 Defendant BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual, is, and at all times alleged herein
was, operating a business of public accommodation in Los Angeles County, California, to wit: a
restaurant known as “BOB’S CAFE” (at times hereinafter “the Business”) upon the Subject
Property.
6 Plaintiff is unaware of the true identities of the defendants sued as Does 1-100
10 herein, and therefore sues them with fictitious names as “Doe” defendants. Plaintiff alleges that
each defendant, including but not limited to each “Doe” defendant, was at all times alleged herein
11
an owner of, and/or operating a public accommodation upon, the Subject Property, and therefore
12
liable for the violations and damages alleged herein.
13 7
Defendants BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual; WILSHIRE SHATTO
14
CENTER, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company; and Does | to 100 shall hereinafter be
15
referred to collectively as “Defendant”. A reference in this Complaint to one Defendant shall refer
16 to each and every Defendant, named or fictitious. Plaintiff will seek leave of the court to amend
17 this Complaint to identify “Doe” defendants by name if and when such names become known to
18 Plaintiff.
19 8 Plaintiff has, and at all times mentioned herein did have, a “disability” as defined by
20 California Civil Code § 51(e)(1) and 42 U.S.C. § 12102, and a “physical disability” as defined by
California Government Code § 12926. Plaintiff is confined to a wheelchair for mobility purposes
21
and suffers from a physiological condition that adversely affects Plaintiff's musculoskeletal system
22
and limits Plaintiff's major life activities, including walking, socializing, and working.
23
9 The Business, located upon the Subject Property, is a “public accommodation”
24
defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7) and California Health and Safety Code 19955.
25
10. On at least two occasions, including but not limited to June 3, 2023, and February 3,
26 2024, prior to the date of filing this complaint, Plaintiff patronized or attempted to patronize the
27 business upon the Subject Property with the intent to be a customer. At the time of each visit,
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 2 of 7
Plaintiff personally encountered construction-related access barriers which prevented Plaintiff's full
and equal access to the business upon the Subject Property. Specifically, Plaintiff encountered a
lack of ADA-compliant seating, to wit: a lack of wheelchair accessible seating in the inside seating
areas and outside seating areas. These violations caused Plaintiff difficulty, discomfort and
embarrassment in that he was unable to patronize Subject Business on an equal basis as non-
disabled patrons. The premises violated the construction-related accessibility standards of Title 24
of the California Code of Regulations and of 28 C.F.R. Part 36 - ADA Accessibility Guidelines
(“ADAAG”). Plaintiff personally encountered these violations, causing Plaintiff difficulty,
discomfort and embarrassment.
11. Based upon the facts alleged herein, Plaintiff
has been discriminated against on the
10 basis of Plaintiff's physical disability and will continue to be discriminated against unless and until
Defendants are enjoined and forced to cease and desist from discriminating against Plaintiff
and
11
others similarly situated. Plaintiff need not prove that that this discrimination is intentional to
12
recover damages for violations of the ADA and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Munson v. Del Taco,
13
Inc., 46 Cal.4th 661, 665 (2009). Plaintiff does not allege that the discrimination by Defendants is
14
intentional.
15
12. At the time of each of the visits by Plaintiffto the Subject Property, one or more of
16 the violations alleged in Paragraph 10 herein denied Plaintiff full and equal access to the business
17 upon the Subject Property by deterring Plaintiff from accessing the business upon the Subject
18 Property or by causing Plaintiff difficulty, discomfort, or embarrassment because of these
19 violation(s) that Plaintiff personally encountered.
20 13. On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges the business upon the Subject Property is
not “CASp-inspected” nor is it “CASp determination pending”, as those terms are defined by
21
California Civil Code § 55.52(a). If Defendant or any defense counsel for Defendant wrongly
22
claims that the business upon the Subject Property is “CASp inspected” or “CASp
23
determination pending” and applies for a stay of the proceedings in this action, PLAINTIFF
24
HEREBY GIVES NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO REQUEST SANCTIONS
25
AGAINST ANY SUCH PARTY AND/OR LEGAL COUNSEL, WITHOUT FURTHER
26 NOTICE, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE § 55.54(e)(1).
27
14. The modifications required to the Subject Property to remedy the discriminatory
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 3 of 7
violations alleged herein and thereby end discrimination by Defendant are “readily achievable” as
defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12181(9) because said modifications are easily accomplishable and able to
be carried out without much difficulty or expense.
15. Before filing this Complaint, Plaintiff obtained a written investigative report
verifying that the business upon the Subject Property is in violation ofdisability-access laws as
alleged herein. This is not a “CASp report” as defined by California Civil Code §§ 55.51, 55.52
55.53, or 55.54 since, on information and belief, the Subject Property has not been “CASp-
inspected” nor is it ““CASp determination pending.” Attached hereto as Exhibit A are true and
correct copies of photos of the subject premises as taken by Plaintiff's investigator.
10 16. Plaintiff desires to return to the business upon the Subject Property in the immediate
11 future without being subjected to further discrimination.
12
13 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
14 (Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(b))
15 (Against All Defendants)
16 17. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point.
17 18 California Civil Code § 51(b), The Unruh Civil Rights Act, provides in pertinent part:
18 "All persons within the jurisdiction ofthis state are free and equal,
and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national
19 origin, disability, or medical condition is entitled to the full and equal
accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all
20 business establishments of every kind whatsoever."
21 19. Defendant has violated and continues to violate California Civil Code § 51(b) by
22 failing and refusing to provide full and equal access by Plaintiffto the business upon the Subject
23 Property on the same basis as other persons who are not similarly disabled.
24 20. The violations of California Civil Code § 51(b) alleged herein make Defendant
25 mandatorily liable to Plaintiff
for damages and attorney’s fees. California Civil Code § 52(a)
26 controls, stating in relevant part:
27 Whoever makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to
Section 51... is liable for each and every offense for the actual
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 4 of 7
damages, and any amount that may be determined by a jury, or a court
sitting without a jury, up to a maximum of three times the amount of
actual damage but in no case less than four thousand dollars
($4,000), and any attorney's fees that may be determined by the
court in addition thereto, suffered by any person denied the rights
provided in Section 51. . .” (emphasis added).
21. Defendant’s discrimination against Plaintiff and those similarly situated has damaged
and continues to damage Plaintiff, and Plaintiff is therefore entitled to a damage award pursuant to
California Civil Code § 52(a).
22. Plaintiff
has suffered damages and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be
determined at trial, but in no event less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000), per California
Civil Code § 52(a) for each of the Plaintiff's two or more visits to the business upon the Subject
10
Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000).
11
12
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
13
(Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(f))
14
(Against All Defendants)
15
23. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point.
16
24. California Civil Code § 51(f) states that “[a] violation of the right of any individual
17
under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336) shall also constitute a
18
violation of this section.”
19
25. Defendant has violated and continues to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act
20
of 1990 (at times hereinafter “ADA”) at 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. through Defendant’s
21
discriminatory actions, as alleged herein.
22
26. Under 28 C.F.R. § 36.201(b), both the operator of the business upon the Subject
23
Property and the owner/landlord of the Subject Property are liable to Plaintiff under the ADA:
24
25 (b) Landlord and tenant responsibilities. Both the landlord who owns
the building that houses a place of public accommodation and the
26 tenant who owns or operates the place of public accommodation are
public accommodations subject to the requirements of this part. As
27 between the parties, allocation of responsibility for complying with
the obligations of this part may be determined by lease or other
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 5 of 7
contract.
27. The portion of the Americans with Disabilities Act containing the general prohibition]
of discrimination against disabled persons by public accommodations is found at 42 U.S.C. §
12182(a), which states:
No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability
in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities,
privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public
accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or
operates a place of public accommodation.
28 Discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a) specifically includes:
[A] failure to make reasonable modifications in policies,
10 practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to
afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or
11 accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can
demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally
12 alter the nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages, or accommodations. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii).
13
14 29. Discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a) also specifically includes “failure to
15 remove architectural barriers, and communication barriers that are structural in nature, in existing
16 facilities . . where such removal is readily achievable.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv) (emphasis
17 added). Thus, there is no “grandfather clause” under the ADA.
18 30. Removal of the construction-related access barriers encountered by Plaintiff as
19 alleged herein is readily achievable but Defendant has chosen not to remove the barriers, despite
20 being warned in writing of the barriers prior to the filing of this action and the ADA being in effect
21 for over three decades.
22 31. Plaintiff
has suffered damages and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be
23 determined at trial, but in no event less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000), per California
24 Civil Code § 52(a) for each of Plaintiff's two or more visits to the business upon the Subject
25 Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000).
26
27
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 6 of 7
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(DECLARATORY RELIEF UNDER CALIFORNIA STATE LAW ONLY)
(Against All Defendants)
32. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point.
33. An actual controversy now exists in that Defendant is presently in violation of the
disabled-accessibility laws of the State of California codified at California Civil Code § 51.
34. A declaration of Plaintiff’s rights is necessary and appropriate in order for the parties
to this action to know their respective rights and duties under California law. Accordingly, the
court should make a declaration of the rights of the parties.
10 35. The declaratory relief sought in this action is premised upon California law only,
11 whether statutory or equitable, and is not sought pursuant to any federal statute or cause of action.
12
13 WHEREFORE PLAINTIFF PRAYS:
14 1 For damages of no less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000) for each
15 occurrence of discrimination alleged herein, totaling a minimum of Eight Thousand Dollars (USD
16 $8,000), or actual damages to be determined at trial, whichever is greater;
17 2 For injunctive and/or declaratory relief under California law as needed to end the
18 discrimination alleged herein;
19 3 For an award of attorney's fees pursuant to relevant provisions of law;
20 4 For the costs of suit incurred herein; and
21 5 For such other and further reliefas the court deems proper.
22
23 Respectfully submitted, ANDREWS LAW GROUP, INC.
_ b— AE
24
25
Dated: April 25, 2024
26
Brian C. Andrews, Esq. (SBN 212969)
27 Attorney for Plaintiff ROBERT BEST
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 7 of 7
VERIFICATION
I, ROBERT BEST, declare that | am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action. I have read
the foregoing COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof. The same is true of my own
knowledge except as to those matters therein stated on information and belief and, as to those
matters, I believe them to be true.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing)
responses are true and correct to the best of my present knowledge.
10 Executed this: 4/17/2024, at San Diego, California.
41
4.
12
ROBERT BEST
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLAINTIFF'S VERIFICATION TO COMPLAINT
EXHIBIT A
7 7)
~~. \
sot
5 AY
®
r.
\e *
iN a. ae
SS
a
a
SONS
A 2
AY
a Xa
bet
wy
ie
ey
“wet
ae
or
¥
\
Te We Ric? SSeS
_
=
— be Ny
SS .
a
\ Yb
te x Rre
art
S
I< es Y a
en
- Ares
zi
hw io: a
,
a"
i
wat. \ vat a
ars rt
AS: Mee
| it
f i 4
FR ee
ea SS 4 My
oa.
Wy
ye
ih aan
\\ kif a)
M4A 4,
i
Wig).
iD A
a
Met | Ny \\ ‘
AKI anny\ ‘\
y
\
\\ 4 \) * ao
{\
Vay WW
M54
mm
WW A, |
Ny
\ ie
i ihMt ry
\ t)
Nt
y
a
M
1 \ ia
\ ‘ad
Ps)
KL ro
ae
7
iY .
Co
Ee
‘ay
werI
nN)
NS a
\
\
Cyr.
ee |
ss
a
see
.| iN
.
»
as
AVA
4S
{es
uit
re a5
ue
- am
ir
a ;
iw
sy pi
va
a
df 4 | hay
t
fy
Vv f G
La wv
5.
VCO
Sa
SS ’ La
=>
7 =
SS
SS S>"_ 4
" =>
WY
\ Ce
=>
=
my a\\\\
i \\ cn
ey
\N
I
&
,
hog\@ yal
Yt
a PN
Lit
tala sa
tw
\e sy
Uy i
\\
\)
tA
\y
i\
i
a
TT
a
al
4 |We
|
‘a ¥eE
al
2
r
a hg
Mo t
—
od
ge
A at
a
X 4
=)
t)
\ 3 i
I)
Lf if i
iy
M
(1
e.
\\
nae Via
Nt vin
Pat
iy
\
Fr
cL \
ws ers ot A
i> =
—SE
hi
co
Fi
eeee y.
i
4
PE
2 ig
NY
¥
Ny 4
ta
wes
""
"
ae Ny
i
NG
a
At
ie
aS
”
—
: =
=
=
es pk
at el
i or, ro
ree
os mi
ie2 on
ee a ‘£
ee les ae
Sut ee
“fo reike
ee mo
pn —_
re aa
tas
a a3 rs ee
ae a - Se
se Pe
on a
pe aa
| fr
raed eh
Cae)
Cae A
| ae ic my
z nae i
eg HF
hf f
oe ie. 7 7 he
a me
"> a «filed, a ar)
ae Tt er wl ol
ry a
ro 7 a,
et Ch Hor
cf,
Wy
CPi
——
pei
ed
att
a. -
—
—
Soe
=
a
id
Pe
—
—
aN = <—
=r wo
Se
ae.
a ord
TOs
a
cae)
a Fe
Pe ae tn
La er
aad
"fz
wa;
ee
F
a
a
al
file |
ws
Se
“Se 4
| |
it i
4\
hi Wr
Maio.
ee i
i
hy
*
i i
Preview
BRIAN C. ANDREWS, ESQ. (SBN 212969) Electronically FILED by brian@briancandrews.com Superior Court of California, County of Los An geles ANDREWS LAW GROUP 4/25/2024 5:31 PI 6104 Innovation Way David W. Slayton, Carlsbad, CA 92009 Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, Phone: (858) 452-5600 By Y. Tarasyuk, Deputy Clerk Fax: (858) 452-5601 Attorney for Plaintiff, ROBERT BEST SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES —- STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE ROBERT BEST, an individual, Case No.: 24ST OY 10466 10 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Plaintiff, AND DECLARATORY RELIEF 11 vs. (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - 12 DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual; ACCOMMODATION) 13 WILSHIRE SHATTO CENTER, LLC, a (California Civil Code § 51) 14 California Limited Liability Company; and ACTION SUBJECT TO THE DOES | to 100, inclusive, SUPPLEMENTAL FEE IN GOVERNMENT) 15 CODE SECTION 70616.5 (Fee Waiver) Defendants. 16 17 Now Comes Plaintiff ROBERT BEST, by and through attorney Brian C. Andrews, Esq., and 18 alleges as follows: 19 FACTS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION 20 1 The following Complaint is filed by a “high frequency litigant” as defined by Code 21 of Civil Procedure §425.55. Plaintiff was enjoying a visit to the area on the dates alleged herein and 22 decided to visit the subject business described herein. Plaintiff's purpose for visiting the subject 23 business was to patronize and enjoy the goods and/or services offered at the subject business. 24 2 Plaintiff is exempt from the filing fee required by Government Code §70616.5, as he 25 has met the Court requirements to qualify for a Request to Waive Court Fees (“Fee Waiver’). 26 3 Defendant BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual, is, and at all times alleged herein 27 was, doing business in Los Angeles County, California as “BOB’S CAFE”. 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page | of 7 4 Defendant WILSHIRE SHATTO CENTER, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, is, and at all times alleged herein was, an owner and/or landlord of real property in Los Angeles County, California, located at 3130 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90010 that is assigned Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number 5077-011-015 (hereinafter “Subject Property”). 5 Defendant BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual, is, and at all times alleged herein was, operating a business of public accommodation in Los Angeles County, California, to wit: a restaurant known as “BOB’S CAFE” (at times hereinafter “the Business”) upon the Subject Property. 6 Plaintiff is unaware of the true identities of the defendants sued as Does 1-100 10 herein, and therefore sues them with fictitious names as “Doe” defendants. Plaintiff alleges that each defendant, including but not limited to each “Doe” defendant, was at all times alleged herein 11 an owner of, and/or operating a public accommodation upon, the Subject Property, and therefore 12 liable for the violations and damages alleged herein. 13 7 Defendants BOURHAN MUSTAFA, an individual; WILSHIRE SHATTO 14 CENTER, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company; and Does | to 100 shall hereinafter be 15 referred to collectively as “Defendant”. A reference in this Complaint to one Defendant shall refer 16 to each and every Defendant, named or fictitious. Plaintiff will seek leave of the court to amend 17 this Complaint to identify “Doe” defendants by name if and when such names become known to 18 Plaintiff. 19 8 Plaintiff has, and at all times mentioned herein did have, a “disability” as defined by 20 California Civil Code § 51(e)(1) and 42 U.S.C. § 12102, and a “physical disability” as defined by California Government Code § 12926. Plaintiff is confined to a wheelchair for mobility purposes 21 and suffers from a physiological condition that adversely affects Plaintiff's musculoskeletal system 22 and limits Plaintiff's major life activities, including walking, socializing, and working. 23 9 The Business, located upon the Subject Property, is a “public accommodation” 24 defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12181(7) and California Health and Safety Code 19955. 25 10. On at least two occasions, including but not limited to June 3, 2023, and February 3, 26 2024, prior to the date of filing this complaint, Plaintiff patronized or attempted to patronize the 27 business upon the Subject Property with the intent to be a customer. At the time of each visit, 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 2 of 7 Plaintiff personally encountered construction-related access barriers which prevented Plaintiff's full and equal access to the business upon the Subject Property. Specifically, Plaintiff encountered a lack of ADA-compliant seating, to wit: a lack of wheelchair accessible seating in the inside seating areas and outside seating areas. These violations caused Plaintiff difficulty, discomfort and embarrassment in that he was unable to patronize Subject Business on an equal basis as non- disabled patrons. The premises violated the construction-related accessibility standards of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations and of 28 C.F.R. Part 36 - ADA Accessibility Guidelines (“ADAAG”). Plaintiff personally encountered these violations, causing Plaintiff difficulty, discomfort and embarrassment. 11. Based upon the facts alleged herein, Plaintiff has been discriminated against on the 10 basis of Plaintiff's physical disability and will continue to be discriminated against unless and until Defendants are enjoined and forced to cease and desist from discriminating against Plaintiff and 11 others similarly situated. Plaintiff need not prove that that this discrimination is intentional to 12 recover damages for violations of the ADA and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Munson v. Del Taco, 13 Inc., 46 Cal.4th 661, 665 (2009). Plaintiff does not allege that the discrimination by Defendants is 14 intentional. 15 12. At the time of each of the visits by Plaintiffto the Subject Property, one or more of 16 the violations alleged in Paragraph 10 herein denied Plaintiff full and equal access to the business 17 upon the Subject Property by deterring Plaintiff from accessing the business upon the Subject 18 Property or by causing Plaintiff difficulty, discomfort, or embarrassment because of these 19 violation(s) that Plaintiff personally encountered. 20 13. On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges the business upon the Subject Property is not “CASp-inspected” nor is it “CASp determination pending”, as those terms are defined by 21 California Civil Code § 55.52(a). If Defendant or any defense counsel for Defendant wrongly 22 claims that the business upon the Subject Property is “CASp inspected” or “CASp 23 determination pending” and applies for a stay of the proceedings in this action, PLAINTIFF 24 HEREBY GIVES NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO REQUEST SANCTIONS 25 AGAINST ANY SUCH PARTY AND/OR LEGAL COUNSEL, WITHOUT FURTHER 26 NOTICE, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE § 55.54(e)(1). 27 14. The modifications required to the Subject Property to remedy the discriminatory 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 3 of 7 violations alleged herein and thereby end discrimination by Defendant are “readily achievable” as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12181(9) because said modifications are easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense. 15. Before filing this Complaint, Plaintiff obtained a written investigative report verifying that the business upon the Subject Property is in violation ofdisability-access laws as alleged herein. This is not a “CASp report” as defined by California Civil Code §§ 55.51, 55.52 55.53, or 55.54 since, on information and belief, the Subject Property has not been “CASp- inspected” nor is it ““CASp determination pending.” Attached hereto as Exhibit A are true and correct copies of photos of the subject premises as taken by Plaintiff's investigator. 10 16. Plaintiff desires to return to the business upon the Subject Property in the immediate 11 future without being subjected to further discrimination. 12 13 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 14 (Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(b)) 15 (Against All Defendants) 16 17. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point. 17 18 California Civil Code § 51(b), The Unruh Civil Rights Act, provides in pertinent part: 18 "All persons within the jurisdiction ofthis state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national 19 origin, disability, or medical condition is entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all 20 business establishments of every kind whatsoever." 21 19. Defendant has violated and continues to violate California Civil Code § 51(b) by 22 failing and refusing to provide full and equal access by Plaintiffto the business upon the Subject 23 Property on the same basis as other persons who are not similarly disabled. 24 20. The violations of California Civil Code § 51(b) alleged herein make Defendant 25 mandatorily liable to Plaintiff for damages and attorney’s fees. California Civil Code § 52(a) 26 controls, stating in relevant part: 27 Whoever makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to Section 51... is liable for each and every offense for the actual 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 4 of 7 damages, and any amount that may be determined by a jury, or a court sitting without a jury, up to a maximum of three times the amount of actual damage but in no case less than four thousand dollars ($4,000), and any attorney's fees that may be determined by the court in addition thereto, suffered by any person denied the rights provided in Section 51. . .” (emphasis added). 21. Defendant’s discrimination against Plaintiff and those similarly situated has damaged and continues to damage Plaintiff, and Plaintiff is therefore entitled to a damage award pursuant to California Civil Code § 52(a). 22. Plaintiff has suffered damages and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but in no event less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000), per California Civil Code § 52(a) for each of the Plaintiff's two or more visits to the business upon the Subject 10 Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000). 11 12 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 13 (Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(f)) 14 (Against All Defendants) 15 23. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point. 16 24. California Civil Code § 51(f) states that “[a] violation of the right of any individual 17 under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336) shall also constitute a 18 violation of this section.” 19 25. Defendant has violated and continues to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act 20 of 1990 (at times hereinafter “ADA”) at 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. through Defendant’s 21 discriminatory actions, as alleged herein. 22 26. Under 28 C.F.R. § 36.201(b), both the operator of the business upon the Subject 23 Property and the owner/landlord of the Subject Property are liable to Plaintiff under the ADA: 24 25 (b) Landlord and tenant responsibilities. Both the landlord who owns the building that houses a place of public accommodation and the 26 tenant who owns or operates the place of public accommodation are public accommodations subject to the requirements of this part. As 27 between the parties, allocation of responsibility for complying with the obligations of this part may be determined by lease or other 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 5 of 7 contract. 27. The portion of the Americans with Disabilities Act containing the general prohibition] of discrimination against disabled persons by public accommodations is found at 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a), which states: No individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases (or leases to), or operates a place of public accommodation. 28 Discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a) specifically includes: [A] failure to make reasonable modifications in policies, 10 practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or 11 accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally 12 alter the nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii). 13 14 29. Discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a) also specifically includes “failure to 15 remove architectural barriers, and communication barriers that are structural in nature, in existing 16 facilities . . where such removal is readily achievable.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv) (emphasis 17 added). Thus, there is no “grandfather clause” under the ADA. 18 30. Removal of the construction-related access barriers encountered by Plaintiff as 19 alleged herein is readily achievable but Defendant has chosen not to remove the barriers, despite 20 being warned in writing of the barriers prior to the filing of this action and the ADA being in effect 21 for over three decades. 22 31. Plaintiff has suffered damages and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be 23 determined at trial, but in no event less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000), per California 24 Civil Code § 52(a) for each of Plaintiff's two or more visits to the business upon the Subject 25 Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000). 26 27 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 6 of 7 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (DECLARATORY RELIEF UNDER CALIFORNIA STATE LAW ONLY) (Against All Defendants) 32. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point. 33. An actual controversy now exists in that Defendant is presently in violation of the disabled-accessibility laws of the State of California codified at California Civil Code § 51. 34. A declaration of Plaintiff’s rights is necessary and appropriate in order for the parties to this action to know their respective rights and duties under California law. Accordingly, the court should make a declaration of the rights of the parties. 10 35. The declaratory relief sought in this action is premised upon California law only, 11 whether statutory or equitable, and is not sought pursuant to any federal statute or cause of action. 12 13 WHEREFORE PLAINTIFF PRAYS: 14 1 For damages of no less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000) for each 15 occurrence of discrimination alleged herein, totaling a minimum of Eight Thousand Dollars (USD 16 $8,000), or actual damages to be determined at trial, whichever is greater; 17 2 For injunctive and/or declaratory relief under California law as needed to end the 18 discrimination alleged herein; 19 3 For an award of attorney's fees pursuant to relevant provisions of law; 20 4 For the costs of suit incurred herein; and 21 5 For such other and further reliefas the court deems proper. 22 23 Respectfully submitted, ANDREWS LAW GROUP, INC. _ b— AE 24 25 Dated: April 25, 2024 26 Brian C. Andrews, Esq. (SBN 212969) 27 Attorney for Plaintiff ROBERT BEST 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 7 of 7 VERIFICATION I, ROBERT BEST, declare that | am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action. I have read the foregoing COMPLAINT and know the contents thereof. The same is true of my own knowledge except as to those matters therein stated on information and belief and, as to those matters, I believe them to be true. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing) responses are true and correct to the best of my present knowledge. 10 Executed this: 4/17/2024, at San Diego, California. 41 4. 12 ROBERT BEST 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLAINTIFF'S VERIFICATION TO COMPLAINT EXHIBIT A 7 7) ~~. \ sot 5 AY ® r. \e * iN a. ae SS a a SONS A 2 AY a Xa bet wy ie ey “wet ae or ¥ \ Te We Ric? SSeS _ = — be Ny SS . a \ Yb te x Rre art S I< es Y a en - Ares zi hw io: a , a" i wat. \ vat a ars rt AS: Mee | it f i 4 FR ee ea SS 4 My oa. Wy ye ih aan \\ kif a) M4A 4, i Wig). iD A a Met | Ny \\ ‘ AKI anny\ ‘\ y \ \\ 4 \) * ao {\ Vay WW M54 mm WW A, | Ny \ ie i ihMt ry \ t) Nt y a M 1 \ ia \ ‘ad Ps) KL ro ae 7 iY . Co Ee ‘ay werI nN) NS a \ \ Cyr. ee | ss a see .| iN . » as AVA 4S {es uit re a5 ue - am ir a ; iw sy pi va a df 4 | hay t fy Vv f G La wv 5. VCO Sa SS ’ La => 7 = SS SS S>"_ 4 " => WY \ Ce => = my a\\\\ i \\ cn ey \N I & , hog\@ yal Yt a PN Lit tala sa tw \e sy Uy i \\ \) tA \y i\ i a TT a al 4 |We | ‘a ¥eE al 2 r a hg Mo t — od ge A at a X 4 =) t) \ 3 i I) Lf if i iy M (1 e. \\ nae Via Nt vin Pat iy \ Fr cL \ ws ers ot A i> = —SE hi co Fi eeee y. i 4 PE 2 ig NY ¥ Ny 4 ta wes "" " ae Ny i NG a At ie aS ” — : = = = es pk at el i or, ro ree os mi ie2 on ee a ‘£ ee les ae Sut ee “fo reike ee mo pn —_ re aa tas a a3 rs ee ae a - Se se Pe on a pe aa | fr raed eh Cae) Cae A | ae ic my z nae i eg HF hf f oe ie. 7 7 he a me "> a «filed, a ar) ae Tt er wl ol ry a ro 7 a, et Ch Hor cf, Wy CPi —— pei ed att a. - — — Soe = a id Pe — — aN = <— =r wo Se ae. a ord TOs a cae) a Fe Pe ae tn La er aad "fz wa; ee F a a al file | ws Se “Se 4 | | it i 4\ hi Wr Maio. ee i i hy * i i