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 4:18 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,
MARVIN BARNETT
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES —- STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE
MARVIN BARNETT, an individual, Case No: 24ST OY10458
10 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Plaintiff,
AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
11
vs. (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS -
12 DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC
E.C. II, INC., a California Corporation; E.C. IL., ACCOMMODATION)
13
HOLDING & DEVELOPMENT, 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 MARVIN BARNETT, by and through attorney Brian C. Andrews,
18
Esq., and 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 E.C. I, INC., a California Corporation, is, and at all times alleged herein
27 was, doing business in Los Angeles County, California as “EL COMPADRE”.
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page | of 7
4 Defendant E.C. II., HOLDING & DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a California Limited
Liability Company, is, and at all times alleged herein was, the owner(s) and/or landlord(s) of real
property in Los Angeles County, California, located at 1449 W. Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles,
CA 90026 that is assigned Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number 5406-010-042 (hereinafter
“Subject Property”).
5 Defendant E.C. I, INC., a California Corporation, 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 “EL COMPADRE?” (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 E.C. II, INC., a California Corporation; E.C. II., HOLDING &
14
DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company; and Does | to 100 shall
15
hereinafter be referred to collectively as “Defendant”. A reference in this Complaint to one
16 Defendant shall refer to each and every Defendant, named or fictitious. Plaintiff will seek leave of
17 the court to amend this Complaint to identify “Doe” defendants by name if and when such names
18 become known to 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 November 4, 2022, and
26 January 12, 2024, prior to the date of filing this complaint, Plaintiff patronized or attempted to
27 patronize the business upon the Subject Property with the intent to be a customer. At the time of
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 2 of 7
each visit, 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
counter seating areas and booth seating areas. Plaintiff also encountered a lack of ADA-compliant
restrooms, fo wit, restroom fixtures at the improper height and spacing as well as improper
hardware. 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.
10 11. Based upon the facts alleged herein, Plaintiff
has been discriminated against on the
basis of Plaintiff's physical disability and will continue to be discriminated against unless and until
11
Defendants are enjoined and forced to cease and desist from discriminating against Plaintiff
and
12
others similarly situated. Plaintiff need not prove that that this discrimination is intentional to
13
recover damages for violations of the ADA and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Munson v. Del Taco,
14
Inc., 46 Cal.4th 661, 665 (2009). Plaintiff does not allege that the discrimination by Defendants is
15
intentional.
16 12. At the time of each of the visits by Plaintiffto the Subject Property, one or more of
17 the violations alleged in Paragraph 10 herein denied Plaintiff full and equal access to the business
18 upon the Subject Property by deterring Plaintiff from accessing the business upon the Subject
19 Property or by causing Plaintiff difficulty, discomfort, or embarrassment because of these
20 violation(s) that Plaintiff personally encountered.
13. On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges the business upon the Subject Property is
21
not “CASp-inspected” nor is it “CASp determination pending”, as those terms are defined by
22
California Civil Code § 55.52(a). If Defendant or any defense counsel for Defendant wrongly
23
claims that the business upon the Subject Property is “CASp inspected” or “CASp
24
determination pending” and applies for a stay of the proceedings in this action, PLAINTIFF
25
HEREBY GIVES NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO REQUEST SANCTIONS
26 AGAINST ANY SUCH PARTY AND/OR LEGAL COUNSEL, WITHOUT FURTHER
27 NOTICE, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE § 55.54(e)(1).
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 3 of 7
14. The modifications required to the Subject Property to remedy the discriminatory
violations alleged herein and thereby end discrimination by Defendant are “readily achievable”
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
10 correct copies of photos of the subject premises as taken by Plaintiff's investigator.
11 16. Plaintiff desires to return to the business upon the Subject Property in the immediate
12 future without being subjected to further discrimination.
13
14 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
15 (Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(b))
16 (Against All Defendants)
17 17. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point.
18 18 California Civil Code § 51(b), The Unruh Civil Rights Act, provides in pertinent part:
19 "All persons within the jurisdiction ofthis state are free and equal,
and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national
20 origin, disability, or medical condition is entitled to the full and equal
accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all
21 business establishments of every kind whatsoever."
22 19. Defendant has violated and continues to violate California Civil Code § 51(b) by
23 failing and refusing to provide full and equal access by Plaintiffto the business upon the Subject
24 Property on the same basis as other persons who are not similarly disabled.
25 20. The violations of California Civil Code § 51(b) alleged herein make Defendant
26 mandatorily liable to Plaintiff
for damages and attorney’s fees. California Civil Code § 52(a)
27 controls, stating in relevant part:
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 4 of 7
Whoever makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to
Section 51... is liable for each and every offense for the actual
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
10
Civil Code § 52(a) for each of the Plaintiff's two or more visits to the business upon the Subject
11
Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000).
12
13
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
14
(Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(f))
15
(Against All Defendants)
16
23. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point.
17
24. California Civil Code § 51(f) states that “[a] violation of the right of any individual
18
under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336) shall also constitute a
19
violation of this section.”
20
25. Defendant has violated and continues to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act
21
of 1990 (at times hereinafter “ADA”) at 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. through Defendant’s
22
discriminatory actions, as alleged herein.
23
26. Under 28 C.F.R. § 36.201(b), both the operator of the business upon the Subject
24
Property and the owner/landlord of the Subject Property are liable to Plaintiff under the ADA:
25
26 (b) Landlord and tenant responsibilities. Both the landlord who owns
the building that houses a place of public accommodation and the
27 tenant who owns or operates the place of public accommodation are
public accommodations subject to the requirements of this part. As
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 5 of 7
between the parties, allocation of responsibility for complying with
the obligations of this part may be determined by lease or other
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:
10
[A] failure to make reasonable modifications in policies,
11 practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to
afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or
12 accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can
demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally
13 alter the nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages, or accommodations. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii).
14
15 29. Discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a) also specifically includes “failure to
16 remove architectural barriers, and communication barriers that are structural in nature, in existing
17 facilities . . where such removal is readily achievable.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv) (emphasis
18 added). Thus, there is no “grandfather clause” under the ADA.
19 30. Removal of the construction-related access barriers encountered by Plaintiff as
20 alleged herein is readily achievable but Defendant has chosen not to remove the barriers, despite
21 being warned in writing of the barriers prior to the filing of this action and the ADA being in effect
22 for over three decades.
23 31. Plaintiff
has suffered damages and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be
24 determined at trial, but in no event less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000), per California
25 Civil Code § 52(a) for each of Plaintiffs two or more visits to the business upon the Subject
26 Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000).
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 MARVIN BARNETT
28
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
(VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION)
Page 7 of 7
VERIFICATION
I, MARVIN BARNETT, declare that | am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action. | 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: 04/17/2024, at San Diego, California.
11
12
Me. Rant h
MARVIN BARNETT
13
15
16
i7
i8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLAINTIFF'S VERIFICATION TO COMPLAINT
EXHIBIT A
tae
Le
ae
=—
—- i
es
—
(a
ae
so es
- | rae
ee eS .
el”
-
Cand
=
(bes
_. * aoe]
Se ie
=a
aad
3 ,
—_
a.
va
Yaad |
Lg
we
om
bet
i
es
am
— car
a
a
race
|
i]
a
)
a
»)
ct
Vea +
AV Nl es = a
“ y
er
our
>
ee
a mo Ce
>
ca a a2 ‘J bee -—_
a
am ant
|
ty
\ Fags
1
qnDae be er
nis
ae
thes
mn
nll
pS \ ad
hl
ay
ai
=
oe
a
7
"
a
ct
ay
.
i) a
ss
ss
ny a bs
i
7
—— |
Seige
} Ss
:\
ee
«
Be
i
a
‘eu
A a
a re
aS
ye
dd)
as A
i}
a |
; AL
i |
1‘
a
| . i B
be,
i
nM
=
ry
Se eo
ee ia
Pee bh
id
‘i
wy
,
2 we
ae
.
Ps
:\
4
—
—
_ > -
;
AS I
aes
, rg
ws
=
a,
ay
i,
ee
oe
Sad
—
see
i
a
rt
a
=
ws
=
a,
ay
i,
ee
oe
Sad
—
see
i
a
rt
a
=
ee oe
Se ———
MH
,oo
——
l eel
|
|
ee —— 5
—
Ya
\e y
i
a
oo
i
4 en. i
ad
fh
7)
ye
i ,
ris a
ui
: A ial pot
Ph}
haw 2 7
we a
:
%
=
+.
3
ye x
“>
% >
>. I
*\
x
oe ‘
1
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 4:18 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, MARVIN BARNETT SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES —- STANLEY MOSK COURTHOUSE MARVIN BARNETT, an individual, Case No: 24ST OY10458 10 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Plaintiff, AND DECLARATORY RELIEF 11 vs. (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - 12 DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC E.C. II, INC., a California Corporation; E.C. IL., ACCOMMODATION) 13 HOLDING & DEVELOPMENT, 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 MARVIN BARNETT, by and through attorney Brian C. Andrews, 18 Esq., and 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 E.C. I, INC., a California Corporation, is, and at all times alleged herein 27 was, doing business in Los Angeles County, California as “EL COMPADRE”. 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page | of 7 4 Defendant E.C. II., HOLDING & DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, is, and at all times alleged herein was, the owner(s) and/or landlord(s) of real property in Los Angeles County, California, located at 1449 W. Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90026 that is assigned Los Angeles County Assessor Parcel Number 5406-010-042 (hereinafter “Subject Property”). 5 Defendant E.C. I, INC., a California Corporation, 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 “EL COMPADRE?” (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 E.C. II, INC., a California Corporation; E.C. II., HOLDING & 14 DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company; and Does | to 100 shall 15 hereinafter be referred to collectively as “Defendant”. A reference in this Complaint to one 16 Defendant shall refer to each and every Defendant, named or fictitious. Plaintiff will seek leave of 17 the court to amend this Complaint to identify “Doe” defendants by name if and when such names 18 become known to 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 November 4, 2022, and 26 January 12, 2024, prior to the date of filing this complaint, Plaintiff patronized or attempted to 27 patronize the business upon the Subject Property with the intent to be a customer. At the time of 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 2 of 7 each visit, 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 counter seating areas and booth seating areas. Plaintiff also encountered a lack of ADA-compliant restrooms, fo wit, restroom fixtures at the improper height and spacing as well as improper hardware. 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. 10 11. Based upon the facts alleged herein, Plaintiff has been discriminated against on the basis of Plaintiff's physical disability and will continue to be discriminated against unless and until 11 Defendants are enjoined and forced to cease and desist from discriminating against Plaintiff and 12 others similarly situated. Plaintiff need not prove that that this discrimination is intentional to 13 recover damages for violations of the ADA and the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Munson v. Del Taco, 14 Inc., 46 Cal.4th 661, 665 (2009). Plaintiff does not allege that the discrimination by Defendants is 15 intentional. 16 12. At the time of each of the visits by Plaintiffto the Subject Property, one or more of 17 the violations alleged in Paragraph 10 herein denied Plaintiff full and equal access to the business 18 upon the Subject Property by deterring Plaintiff from accessing the business upon the Subject 19 Property or by causing Plaintiff difficulty, discomfort, or embarrassment because of these 20 violation(s) that Plaintiff personally encountered. 13. On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges the business upon the Subject Property is 21 not “CASp-inspected” nor is it “CASp determination pending”, as those terms are defined by 22 California Civil Code § 55.52(a). If Defendant or any defense counsel for Defendant wrongly 23 claims that the business upon the Subject Property is “CASp inspected” or “CASp 24 determination pending” and applies for a stay of the proceedings in this action, PLAINTIFF 25 HEREBY GIVES NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF’S INTENT TO REQUEST SANCTIONS 26 AGAINST ANY SUCH PARTY AND/OR LEGAL COUNSEL, WITHOUT FURTHER 27 NOTICE, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE § 55.54(e)(1). 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 3 of 7 14. The modifications required to the Subject Property to remedy the discriminatory violations alleged herein and thereby end discrimination by Defendant are “readily achievable” 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 10 correct copies of photos of the subject premises as taken by Plaintiff's investigator. 11 16. Plaintiff desires to return to the business upon the Subject Property in the immediate 12 future without being subjected to further discrimination. 13 14 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 15 (Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(b)) 16 (Against All Defendants) 17 17. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point. 18 18 California Civil Code § 51(b), The Unruh Civil Rights Act, provides in pertinent part: 19 "All persons within the jurisdiction ofthis state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national 20 origin, disability, or medical condition is entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all 21 business establishments of every kind whatsoever." 22 19. Defendant has violated and continues to violate California Civil Code § 51(b) by 23 failing and refusing to provide full and equal access by Plaintiffto the business upon the Subject 24 Property on the same basis as other persons who are not similarly disabled. 25 20. The violations of California Civil Code § 51(b) alleged herein make Defendant 26 mandatorily liable to Plaintiff for damages and attorney’s fees. California Civil Code § 52(a) 27 controls, stating in relevant part: 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 4 of 7 Whoever makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to Section 51... is liable for each and every offense for the actual 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 10 Civil Code § 52(a) for each of the Plaintiff's two or more visits to the business upon the Subject 11 Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000). 12 13 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 14 (Violation of The Unruh Civil Rights Act — California Civil Code § 51(f)) 15 (Against All Defendants) 16 23. Plaintiff incorporates all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint at this point. 17 24. California Civil Code § 51(f) states that “[a] violation of the right of any individual 18 under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-336) shall also constitute a 19 violation of this section.” 20 25. Defendant has violated and continues to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act 21 of 1990 (at times hereinafter “ADA”) at 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq. through Defendant’s 22 discriminatory actions, as alleged herein. 23 26. Under 28 C.F.R. § 36.201(b), both the operator of the business upon the Subject 24 Property and the owner/landlord of the Subject Property are liable to Plaintiff under the ADA: 25 26 (b) Landlord and tenant responsibilities. Both the landlord who owns the building that houses a place of public accommodation and the 27 tenant who owns or operates the place of public accommodation are public accommodations subject to the requirements of this part. As 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 5 of 7 between the parties, allocation of responsibility for complying with the obligations of this part may be determined by lease or other 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: 10 [A] failure to make reasonable modifications in policies, 11 practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or 12 accommodations to individuals with disabilities, unless the entity can demonstrate that making such modifications would fundamentally 13 alter the nature of such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations. 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(ii). 14 15 29. Discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 12182(a) also specifically includes “failure to 16 remove architectural barriers, and communication barriers that are structural in nature, in existing 17 facilities . . where such removal is readily achievable.” 42 U.S.C. § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iv) (emphasis 18 added). Thus, there is no “grandfather clause” under the ADA. 19 30. Removal of the construction-related access barriers encountered by Plaintiff as 20 alleged herein is readily achievable but Defendant has chosen not to remove the barriers, despite 21 being warned in writing of the barriers prior to the filing of this action and the ADA being in effect 22 for over three decades. 23 31. Plaintiff has suffered damages and continues to suffer damages in an amount to be 24 determined at trial, but in no event less than Four Thousand Dollars (USD $4,000), per California 25 Civil Code § 52(a) for each of Plaintiffs two or more visits to the business upon the Subject 26 Property, for total minimum damages of at least Eight Thousand Dollars (USD $8,000). 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 MARVIN BARNETT 28 VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND DECLARATORY RELIEF (VIOLATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS - DISCRIMINATION BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION) Page 7 of 7 VERIFICATION I, MARVIN BARNETT, declare that | am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action. | 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: 04/17/2024, at San Diego, California. 11 12 Me. Rant h MARVIN BARNETT 13 15 16 i7 i8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLAINTIFF'S VERIFICATION TO COMPLAINT EXHIBIT A tae Le ae =— —- i es — (a ae so es - | rae ee eS . el” - Cand = (bes _. * aoe] Se ie =a aad 3 , —_ a. va Yaad | Lg we om bet i es am — car a a race | i] a ) a ») ct Vea + AV Nl es = a “ y er our > ee a mo Ce > ca a a2 ‘J bee -—_ a am ant | ty \ Fags 1 qnDae be er nis ae thes mn nll pS \ ad hl ay ai = oe a 7 " a ct ay . i) a ss ss ny a bs i 7 —— | Seige } Ss :\ ee « Be i a ‘eu A a a re aS ye dd) as A i} a | ; AL i | 1‘ a | . i B be, i nM = ry Se eo ee ia Pee bh id ‘i wy , 2 we ae . Ps :\ 4 — — _ > - ; AS I aes , rg ws = a, ay i, ee oe Sad — see i a rt a = ws = a, ay i, ee oe Sad — see i a rt a = ee oe Se ——— MH ,oo —— l eel | | ee —— 5 — Ya \e y i a oo i 4 en. i ad fh 7) ye i , ris a ui : A ial pot Ph} haw 2 7 we a : % = +. 3 ye x “> % > >. I *\ x oe ‘ 1