CALA Blog

The CALA “Create Jobs, Not Lawsuits” Tour comes San Diego

The CALA “Create Jobs, Not Lawsuits” tour came to San Diego on March 23 to rally the community in support of legal reform. Several small business owners who have been the victims of abusive lawsuits joined Assemblyman Brian Jones, a member of the Assembly Judiciary Committee, who shared his efforts to combat abusive lawsuits and support legal reform in the Legislature.

The event took place inside the warehouse of Coles Carpets, a vibrant local business that has faced three unwarranted ADA lawsuits, as the San Diego Union-Tribune reported. Several small business owners shared their experiences with abusive ADA lawsuits.

One local dentist was sued for an ADA violation, and because the plaintiff had never even entered the dental office, the legal insurance didn’t cover the cost. Another small business owner from Julian, CA explained that she was sued along with 67 other small businesses for ADA violations– all by the same plaintiff. Many of the businesses in Julian closed as a direct result of these lawsuits, costing the community jobs and hurting the local economy.

One common theme among all these stories is that the alleged technical issues of non-compliance with the ADA could have been easily fixed and disabled access would have been increased. However, these plaintiffs were more interested in pursuing a monetary settlement than increasing access. The fact that our legal system tolerates this type of abuse makes it plain that we need legal reform now.

The next stop on the “Create Jobs, Not Lawsuits” tour is in Los Angeles on April 4th when Los Angeles City Attorney Carmen Trutanich will explain what the City of Los Angeles is doing to protect itself from abusive lawsuits.

If you would like to join us in Los Angeles on April 4, click here.

Support SB 1478 – Appeals Bond Cap

SB 1478 is authored by State Senator Tom Harman and sponsored by the Civil Justice Association of California. It would place a cap on the amount a defendant must post in order to stay a judgment and appeal a verdict. 

California law requires defendants to post 150 percent of a judgment to have an appeal heard. Quite frankly, this is unfair and onerous. These days, enormous verdicts have become fairly common, and forcing defendants to post 150 percent of a judgment to appeal can force businesses into bankruptcy.

A litigant’s right to appeal an adverse judgment is a bedrock principle in our system of justice. The combination of a huge plaintiff’s verdict and the defendant’s inability to post an appeal bond means that a judgment will evade appellate review.

SB 1478 would place a $25 million cap on the amount a defendant must post as a bond in order to stay a judgment and pursue an appeal. For small businesses, the bill would set that limit at $1 million. This law would align California with federal law and many other states that have implemented reforms of appeal bond requirements.

CALA believes SB 1478 is worthy legislation and would be a step in the right direction for California. Please support this legislation and help us put California back on track to creating jobs, not adding to the unemployment rolls.

To tell your legislators to support SB 1478, click here.

ADA Lawsuit Reform – Is It Possible?

You no doubt are aware that there is a group of trial lawyers running around the State of California filing lawsuits against small businesses and even cities are that not compliant with the American with Disabilities Act. The California Commission on Disability Access has spent more than three years trying to get its house in order with little or no progress – and the lawsuits continue to be filed.

Lawyers Against Lawsuit Abuse has stated that there have been approximately between 25,139 and 34,763 ADA/access lawsuits filed in California just over the past few years.

We all want access. Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse just believes we can get access without litigation. These shakedowns are not benefiting anyone. They are simply putting people out of business or costing thousands of dollars.

Any reasonable person could look at the situation in California and say enough is enough. We need to fix this problem now and stop the lawsuits. However, that is not happening and the question you have to ask is why? Is it just politics or is it the hammer lock that trial lawyers have on Sacramento?

If 98 percent of businesses are non-compliant that tells me that there is something wrong. Either the law is confusing or there is no easy way for a business to know if it is or is not compliant. If it was the other way around we would be the first to tell the two percent of non-compliant businesses to get in line and stop violating the law.

So once again, this year in the Legislature we see a stream of bills being offered up as a way to try and stop the lawsuits and increase compliance with the ADA. All of these bills will have to go through either the Assembly Judiciary Committee or the Senate Judiciary Committee. In the past, both of these committees have not been very interested in this kind of legislation. They believe SB 1608 that was signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2008 should be given a chance to work and that nothing more needs to be done.

This is not the case. SB 1608 has had more than three years to work and nothing is happening. Nothing will happen. SB 1608 is only supposed to study the ADA litigation issue and present a report to the Legislature within the next two years. It will not stop the lawsuits.

Please get involved with CALA and help us stop these abuse ADA lawsuits. We need to be creating jobs, not lawsuits.

Settlement Claims Legislation? Are you Outraged?

Thanks to State Senators Joel Anderson and Doug La Malfa for exposing one of the Legislature’s dirty little secrets. On February 17th, they wrote an op-ed for the Sacramento Bee titled, “Taxpayers Shouldn’t Foot Bill for Lawsuits Against the State,” in which they discussed SB 730 by State Senator Christine Kehoe, the Chairwoman for the Senate Appropriations Committee. This measure is one of the annual “settlement claims” bills that get little or no debate each year but cost millions of taxpayer dollars.

These bills do not even go through a policy committee and are whipped through the appropriations committees and the Senate and Assembly floors with little or no discussion. Senators Anderson and LaMalfa claim this is the case because there are sometimes big payoffs to special interests. These bills are an annual rite of passage, but lately the settlements have been getting more and more controversial. Quite frankly there should be more discussion about the cost of litigation and how it is impacting the state.

A long time ago former Attorney General Bill Lockyer stated at a Press Club event that at any given moment there are approximately 50,000 lawsuits against the State of California. On one level, I understand it and yet on another I find it outrageous. Our state is in a horrible financial crisis and our state Legislature is unwilling to pass legal reform. These endless settlements over lawsuits not only place an additional financial burden on the state, but they divert money away from the state that could be going to jobs and making our state more efficient.

The California Department of Transportation alone got hit for a $1.1 billion dollar settlement related to ADA access. It will require CalTrans to spend $1.1 billion towards ADA access over the next 30 years. This is just one example of the financial hit against the state when it comes to litigation. And it has nothing to do with whether the lawsuits are meritorious or not. State prisons each have one litigation coordinator to deal with all of the prisoner lawsuits being filed at their facilities.

These Settlement Claims bills just expose the state Legislature’s attitude towards litigation. As Senators Anderson and LaMalfa point out, one of these claims bills a few years ago contained a proposed financial settlement for a drunk driver who drove into a state building. Is that what taxpayers want their money being spent on? I do not think so. I think they would be outraged that the Legislature is quietly sliding this stuff through the system with little or no debate. CALA will continue to discuss the issue of settlement claims legislation so that taxpayers do not get ripped off. Thank you Senators Anderson and LaMalfa!

What is a Vexatious Litigant and Who Is One?

 You may have heard the term “vexatious litigant” and quickly think of ADA lawsuits, but that is not exactly what the Judicial Council of the California thinks.

Under the Code of Civil Procedure section 391 (b), a vexatious litigant is a person who does any of the following:

In the immediately preceding seven year period has commenced, prosecuted, or maintained in propria persona at least five litigations other than in small claims court that have been (i) finally determined adversely to the person or (ii) unjustifiably permitted to remain pending at least two years with having brought to trial or hearing.

After litigation has been finally determined against the perso, repeatedly relitigates or attempts to relitigate, propria persona, either (i) the validity of the determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined or (ii) the cause of action, claim, controversy, or any of the issues of fact or law, determined or concluded by the final determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined.

In any litigation while acting in propria persona, repeatedly files unmeritorious motions, pleadings or other papers, conducts unnecessary discovery, or engages in other tactics that are frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.

Has previously been declared to be a vexatious litigant by any other state or federal court of recordin any action or proceeding based upon the same or substantially simlar facts, transactions, or occurrence.

The Administrative Office of the Courts keeps a list of our state’s vexatious litigants. You should check it out here. The Vexatious Litigant List for California contains hundreds of names. This list is distributed to the county court clerks annually and it is updated monthly. As an example, in Orange County there are 77 people who are on the list. One of those individuals has filed over 22 lawsuits since 2006, which the Orange County Register discussed last month.

So why aren’t the lawyers who target businesses with huge numbers of ADA lawsuits included on this list? The vexatious litigant statue does not apply in these cases because these lawyers represent clients, and not themselves.

Unfortunately, because of our state’s complex building codes for disabled access, many small business owners don’t even know they are out of compliance until they are sued, and by then it’s too late. They have to pay thousands of dollars to bring their businesses into compliance, only to face potential lawsuits when the building codes change again. So while these lawyers violate the spirit of the law, they do not violate its letter.

Last year, a bill to allow business owners a period of time to correct alleged ADA violations before they could be taken to court failed to make it out of Senate Judiciary Committee. Legal reform advocates aren’t done trying yet, though. A few different versions of the bill have been proposed this year (more on those to come later), so perhaps legal reform is still a possibility with this Legislature.

Abusive ADA lawsuits destroy small businesses and cost our communities jobs. California needs to reform the way it enforces the ADA to allow businesses and the disabled community to work together. Remember, we need to create jobs in California, not more lawsuits.

Hotel Owners Beware…more Lawsuits on the Way

If you own a hotel or motel with a pool and you haven’t added ADA-compliant lifts to your pools by March 15, 2012, you will be, once again, a target for lawsuits. 

The Department of Justice took months in answering the concerns of lodging owners across America about this issue. The owners have repeatedly requested a clarification of the ADA requirement issued in 2011 regarding pool lifts. The DOJ finally answered their requests on January 31, 2012, saying lift requirements must be met by all hotel and motel owners by March 15 – only 44 days after the DOJ response – before they are open to lawsuits for non-compliance.

In other words, the DOJ took three months to answer the concerns of business owners in writing, yet the requirements they issued expect hotel owners to install ADA-compliant lifts in only 44 days to avoid opening themselves up to lawsuits. What’s more, these lifts aren’t even widely available for purchase yet!

This is wrong and unfair. With all the challenges facing the economy of the United States, we simply can’t afford thousands of costly lawsuits against the lodging industry. To write a letter to your Congressman asking for common-sense changes to this ridiculous requirement, please click here.

Lodi Residents Joined CALA to Say “End Lawsuit Abuse”

Last week, CALA gathered more than 50 small business owners and community leaders in Lodi, CA to discuss the issue of lawsuit abuse and what can be done about it. Lodi and its surrounding cities have been plagued by lawsuit abuse in recent years. Almost every storefront shop owner knows of one or two other businesses that have been hit with an ADA compliance lawsuit.

The speakers at the event included James McCarty, former Mayor of Lodi and lawsuit abuse victim; Ricky Gill, Congressional candidate, Lodi resident and business owner; and Travis Hausauer, a small business owner, lawsuit abuse victim and CALA Co-Chair.

The message from each speaker was clear: lawsuit abuse is hurting our economy and costing California jobs. To let our leaders in Sacramento know how important this issue is, CALA supporters signed a banner asking legislators to pass legal reforms to stop the damage to job growth and the economy caused by lawsuit abuse.

The participants picked up letters in support of both state and federal legislation and information on our upcoming Day at the Capitol, where CALA supporters will tell legislators in person that it’s time to stop this nonsense.

The event also served as the kickoff of the National Create Jobs Not Lawsuits tour, which will visit communities across the nation that have seen firsthand the damage caused by lawsuit abuse. The banner signed by the CALA supporters in Lodi will be heading to the next Create Jobs Not Lawsuits tour event in California where more residents will be gathering to send the same message to Sacramento.

Cities and towns across the state are coming together to make their voices heard. The momentum has started and I hope Sacramento is listening because these victims have no intention of quieting down until they see the legal reform that California so badly needs.

California CALA Kicks Off Create Jobs Not Lawsuits Tour

On February 23, CALA kicked off the national Create Jobs Not Lawsuits tour in Lodi. The tour will visit and team up with other reform organizations around the country in states feeling the strains of lawsuit abuse. Why did CALA kicking off the event in Lodi? It’s a hotbed of lawsuit abuse.
 
It’s an undisputable fact that the California’s legal climate is hindering economic growth and hurting job creation. Californians are fed up with lawmakers‘ continued inability to pass meaningful reforms which would reduce the burden forced upon them and allow them to do what they do best: create jobs and move our economy forward.
 
Our legal climate has already hurt our economy badly. Last year, Andrew Puzder, the CEO of CKE Restaurants, which owns the Carl’s Jr. franchise, announced that the company is scuttling its plans to expand in California due in large part to the legal climate here.
 
Where will CKE Restaurants focus its expansion? Texas, which has taken enormous strides to make its legal climate friendly to business, and as a result has experienced an economic boon while we here in California are left behind.
 
If our politicians aren’t taking the lead on legal reform, it’s time for the voters to let them know that legal reform and job creation go hand in hand and make legal reform a key issue in 2012. The Create Jobs Not Lawsuit tour will do precisely that as it travels across the nation. Hopefully our leaders are listening!

Lodi, CA: Home to Lawsuit Abuse

When people think of Lodi the words that pop to mind might be “wineries” or “quaint small town in California.” What they don’t think of is “home to lawsuit abuse.”

Recently, I visited a neighboring State Assemblymember who showed me a letter from a former Mayor of Lodi and a business owner in Lockeford (a neighboring town). He wrote about the rash of ADA compliance lawsuits that have been occurring in the area.

Lockeford, population 3,200, is a town so small that you could miss it if you blinked while driving by. Yet twelve Lockeford businesses have been recently hit with ADA compliance lawsuits, and many businesses in Lodi have also been hit.

After visiting businesses in Lockeford and Lodi, almost every storefront shop owner knew of one or two other businesses that had been hit with an ADA compliance lawsuit. I came to discover that Lodi, Lockeford and Galt, unassuming quaint towns in the middle of California, had been targeted by three big city trial attorneys in the last couple of years who have systematically gone through the towns and sued every business owner for the slightest ADA infraction they could possibly find within their shop. 

This scenario repeats itself throughout California: a law firm targets small business owners in a specific area and sues every business it can. The unscrupulous lawyers are counting on the fact that the small business owners are not able to afford the legal fees required to contest these lawsuits, and will settle as quickly as possible, usually for a few thousand dollars. The money goes directly into the pockets of the trial lawyers, and the small business owners pay thousands more to upgrade their facilities to get into compliance. Then the access codes are updated a year later, and the process starts over again.

This kind of outrageous lawsuit abuse is hurting large cities and small towns throughout California, dragging down our economy and costing our communities jobs. That’s why CALA is hosting the kick-off event of the national Create Jobs Not Lawsuits tour in Lodi on February 23, 2012 from 9-10:30 am at the Post Office Plaza at the intersection of Oak & School. Come show your support for California’s small business owners and tell our elected leaders that enough is enough – it’s time for legal reform to put a stop to this nonsense.

Clearing the way for claims with merit

A recent article in the Orange County Register, “Clearing the Way for Claims with Merit,” reported that both CALA and consumer rights advocates agree that there is “abuse of the court system in California.”

One way to help stop the abuse is by curbing “vexatious litigants,” those people who continually file lawsuits without merit or harassing claims. The article cites a woman who recently filed 47 lawsuits against the City of Huntington Beach, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office and the Orange County Sheriff’s Department.

Another Register article, “Debate Heated on Frivolous Lawsuits,” highlights a woman who has filed 22 lawsuits since 2006, with the most recent filing in February 2010, and yet another man has filed 13 lawsuits in Orange County Superior Court against his neighbors and the Huntington Beach Police Department alleging harassment.

Now is the time to once again push the Legislature to pass balanced, common-sense reform to prohibit vexatious litigants from filing unwarranted lawsuits that cost jobs and clog up our courtrooms

Legal reforms such as this would bring significant benefits to California. According to the Pacific Research Institute, one tort reform in California could create 141,000 jobs.

Stopping vexatious litigants is just one more way to revitalize California’s economy. It would free up valuable slots on courts’ schedules, which is more important than ever since our courts are facing $300 million in budget cuts. Cases that truly have merit must have their day in court.

We need more jobs, not more lawsuits.