Appeals court decision may help small businesses

OC Register ^ | 9/18/7 | Jan Norman

[SmithL]

The federal courts are the latest to try to stop California attorneys from targeting small businesses for quick profits over minor infractions.

The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently agreed with a lower court to curb the litigious ways of Jarek Molski, a disabled Woodland Hills man, and sanction his lawyer.

Although this particular ruling involved a Solvang restaurant, it will affect similar cases throughout the U.S. Central District, which includes Orange County, and the Ninth District which includes seven states.

Molski had sued more than 400 restaurants around California for violations of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. He objected to “accessibility barriers too numerous to list.” According to court documents he would file almost a year after visiting a restaurant and then seek damages of $4,000 a day from the date of his visit, plus interest and punitive damages.

The federal court declared Molski a vexatious litigant, which means he must get court approval before filing lawsuits. The court also sanctioned his attorney, Thomas Frankovich, based on false allegations of injury. Frankovich did not return Register phone calls.

“This is an extremely important win for small-business owners,” said Karen Harned, executive director of the Legal Foundation of the National Federation of Independent Business, which had urged the Court of Appeals to uphold the ruling. The opinion “sends a crystal clear message to potential serial plaintiffs and their lawyers that the court will not allow plaintiffs to pursue baseless ADA claims.”

Such rulings may send a message, but lawsuits against multiple small businesses still must be fought one at a time. At least business owners can use the Molski decision to defend similar lawsuits.

Register readers will recall that state courts and voters have acted in the past to blunt other gang lawsuits against small businesses:

• From 2003 through 2005, Brea attorney Harpreet Brar filed lawsuits against dozens of nail salons and later more than 100 liquor stores in Orange and Los Angeles counties. In 2006, Superior Court Judge Peter Polos threw Brar in jail for 15 days because he defied court orders to stop suing small businesses.
• In 2003, Beverly Hills attorneys Shane Chang Han, Allan Hendrickson and Damian Trevor resigned from the State Bar to avoid being disbarred. They had sued thousands of auto repair shops and restaurants in Orange and Los Angeles counties.
• In 2004, California voters passed Proposition 64 to require that plaintiffs in consumer protection lawsuits must have personally suffered injury or lost money or property.

[SmithL]

The 9th got one very right.

[neodad]

The broken clock strikes again!

[afortiori]

Jeez, it only took 400 lawsuits?

[skinkinthegrass]

....this makes three cases....they've ruled against liberal lawyers/cases....can't be a tipping point.

[I still care]

We have our own guy in Tampa who does this stuff. He’s driven restaurants out of business.

[art_rocks]

Maybe they are afraid they will be broken up into separate districts so are trying to change.

[skinkinthegrass]

Maybe they are afraid they will be broken up into separate districts so are trying to change.

....seems so, its' not fast enough. :)