Posts Tagged ‘ California ’

Extortion Lawsuits? Yuba City Coughs Up $15k To Make George Louie Go Away

October 17th, 2012. By AbiK

George Louie. If you live on the east coast or do not follow news regarding the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) you probably haven’t heard of Mr. Louie. But PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records) and hundreds of businesses and attorneys sure have. In fact, if you run a case locator search over at PACER right now—even narrow your search to just civil cases—you’ll find 1,060 records for George Louie.

See, he’s one prolific lawsuit filer. He files them pro se (that is, for himself—without an attorney). And, to many, he’s like that mouse that gets in your house and after you set traps, caulk openings, and even shove steel wool into any and every infinitesimal hole—guess what? Sure as shootin’ the darn thing manages to rip open the box of Bisquick® in the pantry. Yep, he’s that kind of annoying.

Given I write for a legal new site, LawyersandSettlements.com, I’m all for justice—and ADA compliance. But I’m not for abusing the system or drumming up lawsuits against small businesses that can potentially drive them into bankruptcy when perhaps there are non-litigious workarounds to improve the situation. I daresay that the small businesses who’ve been targeted by Mr. Louie would do what they could (key words there: ‘what they could’) to provide their wares or services to him or help get him access to their establishments. Most small businesses aren’t in the business of trying to alienate customers. But why work with your foe when you can sue them!

So, note to Louie: if the very change you’re trying to affect can’t take effect because the business you’ve targeted can’t afford to make the change, thereby driving it into bankruptcy at worst or non-compliance penalties at best, what have you accomplished? You’re certainly not winning allies, and you—or the community—risks losing a part of what was helping to contribute to a more vital neighborhood.

But then what’s a community to do when under siege from a court-clogging wannabe hero (or grudge-holder, as Louie reportedly told the Marysville Appeal-Democrat, “I hold grudges”) who’s costing more time, money and effort than the community can bear?

Enter Yuba City, CA.

Yuba City just took a bold—some would say insane—step to put the brakes on George Louie.

They paid him off. Or, I should say, they settled with him, by agreeing to pay him $15,000 in order for him to stop bringing frivolous lawsuits against them and area businesses. According to the MercuryNews (10/15/12), Yuba City’s economic development manager, Darin Gale states Louie has “agreed not to file ADA lawsuits in our city, period. There’s no timetable. It’s forever.”

Now, what this means for future and copycat lawsuit opportunists is yet to be seen. But what does this settlement accomplish?

Well, the obvious is that it gets George Louie off Yuba City small businesses’ backs. As CBS News-Sacramento reported (10/13/12), local business owner Jayne Sawyer—who owns JJ’s Tools and Merchandise—said in regard to the possibility of being targeted by a Louie lawsuit, “We’d probably have to close it down. We do not have the capital; we’re barely breaking even.” Then she says, “It’s just sad because it’s not what the law [ADA] intended to do.”

But it surely doesn’t leave a good taste in everyone’s mouth regarding efforts to put the spotlight on ADA non-compliance. As Yuba City property manager Bill Meagher, who had two tenants sued by Louie, was quoted as saying, “These are extortion lawsuits.” Well, a $15k pay-off could be seen as such.

In addition to the Yuba City settlement, while Louie can continue to file lawsuits in federal court, a report by the Sacramento Bee (10/17/12), indicates Louie was placed on a state list of “vexatious litigants” in June 2011 by a Contra Costa Superior Court judge. So he can no longer file lawsuits in California courts.

At the end of all this, is what Louie’s lawsuits and subsequent backlash will mean to ADA non-compliance efforts. There was probably a time (maybe a decade ago?) when Louie showed promise as an ADA advocate. But for now, he’s gone from the proverbial thorn in the side of complacency to basically an annoying murine intruder who needed to be stopped.

Tags: ADA, California, Discrimination, Frivolous Lawsuit, George Louie, Lawsuit, Rights of the Disabled, Yuba City
Posted in Discrimination, Emerging Issues, lawsuits, Settlement | 1 Comment »

Online Dating: A Sex Offender’s Dream Meet and Greet, Till Now

April 3rd, 2012. By AbiK

: T-shirt available at AllPosters.com

Dating in the real world is hard—you know, you have to try to look half-decent and then there’s the conversation bit—trying to sound both interesting and intelligent with a dose of humor thrown in. Not easy. Particularly if the chemistry just ain’t there. Enter online dating. It’s just easier, right? Stick a profile out there—write it up when you’re at your wittiest, have some friends edit it, find some pics and photoshop them, and you’re good to go. Be the best date prospect you can be because it’s all, well, massaged—the way an ad campaign is.

But here’s the thing. If you can do it—in essence, perpetrate a bit of ‘online fraud’—guess who else can put their best self forward on online dating sites? Sex offenders. And you thought canceled or inactive subscribers was bad!

That’s hopefully about to change. Thanks to attorney Mark Webb and California state attorney general, Kamala Harris, three of the larger online dating sites have agreed to provide online safety tools for daters including: checking subscribers against the national sex offender registries; providing an abuse reporting system for site members; providing proactive education about safe online dating practices; and providing tips on how to safely meet someone offline–as, after all, that’s the goal of an online meetup.

According to a release from the attorney general’s office, “In 2011, 40 million Americans used an online dating service and spent more than $1 billion on online dating website memberships. Of couples married in the last three years, one in six met through an online dating service and one in five people have dated someone they met through an online dating site.”

Given those numbers, it’s no surprise that online dating sites are a natural lure for those seeking a mate. Apparently, that’s what the woman at the root of these changes thought when she became a rape victim while on a date that began as a Match.com meetup.

The victim, known only as Jane Doe from Los Angeles, was on the Match.com-arranged date when she was raped. She found out later that her date was a convicted serial sex offender. Amazingly, in her subsequent Match.com lawsuit (Jane Doe vs. Match.com, Los Angeles Superior Court Case #BC458927) she only sought for Match.com to screen out sex offenders and she waived her right to compensatory damages. She just wanted to spare others from what she’d been through.

Of note as well, her attorney, Mark Webb took on her case pro bono.

In addition to Match.com, the online dating sites who agreed to the above terms include eHarmony.com and Spark Networks (which operates online dating sites including JDate and ChristianMingle).

Tags: Attorney General Kamala Harris, Attorney Mark Webb, California, ChristianMingle, eHarmony.com, JDate, match.com, Match.com Lawsuit, Meeting Online, National Sex Offender Registry, Online Dating Websites, Sex Offenders
Posted in Consumer Fraud, lawsuits | 6 Comments »

Wal-Mart Sex Discrimination Class Action: Slice, Dice and Onward Ho

October 27th, 2011. By AbiK

Close to 80% of you who voted in our poll that asked, “Did the Wal-Mart women have a case?” responded in the affirmative. Clearly, you disagreed with the US Supreme Court after it determined that the original class action lacked a cohesive enough group of plaintiffs (i.e., a “class”) with similar circumstances.

Well, as the saying goes, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned—and sure as shootin’ there are still some mighty ticked off former female Wal-Mart employees who aren’t wanting to just let it ride. Their attorneys aren’t backing down either. They’re just moving on to plan B.

Plan B in this case is to slice and dice the original class action lawsuit—which was nationwide–into smaller regional sex discrimination cases. The first case has just been filed in California—so a heads up to the estimated 45,000 or so current and former California Wal-Mart workers: this is one to watch.

The new smaller lawsuits still allege Wal-Mart discriminated against female employees by paying them less than their male counterparts, and by promoting women less often.

Stay tuned.

Tags: California, Class Action, Wal-Mart Class Action, Wal-Mart Gender Discrimination, Wal-Mart Sex Discrimination
Posted in Class Action, Discrimination, Employment | No Comments »