Confidential

Facts

On Oct. 9, 2002, plaintiff Rochelle, 62, attended a concert with her husband at a church located on defendant's university campus. The couple tried to find handicapped parking because Rochelle was physically disabled. The church lot's gate was locked. As a result, the couple parked at the closest handicapped parking about 750 feet away. As Rochelle, who is retired and walks with a cane due to her arthritis, knee and back problems, approached the church's entrance, she tripped over the base plate of a metal post, which had been removed. The plaintiffs sued the university for violating California Disabilities Rights laws and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title III.

PLAINTIFFS CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiffs contended that the defendant failed to provide disabled access following structural repairs. The plaintiffs also contended that the defendant violated the ADA Title III because it failed to remove "readily achievable" architectural barriers. Pursuant to a claimed violation of Civil Code Section 54.1, California disabled access laws, the plaintiffs argued that liability could be proven by a statutory access violation without regard to wrongful intent or negligence. The plaintiffs also sued on a premises liability theory, arguing that the defendant was negligent for removing the metal post, but leaving the inch-high base. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief requiring the defendant to make all its facilities available to physically disabled persons as required by state and federal law. DEFENDANT

The plaintiffs contended that the defendant failed to provide disabled access following structural repairs. The plaintiffs also contended that the defendant violated the ADA Title III because it failed to remove "readily achievable" architectural barriers. Pursuant to a claimed violation of Civil Code Section 54.1, California disabled access laws, the plaintiffs argued that liability could be proven by a statutory access violation without regard to wrongful intent or negligence. The plaintiffs also sued on a premises liability theory, arguing that the defendant was negligent for removing the metal post, but leaving the inch-high base. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief requiring the defendant to make all its facilities available to physically disabled persons as required by state and federal law. DEFENDANT CONTENTIONS:
The defendant contended that the base plate was no taller than half an inch. The defendant also contended that the university had removed all base plates by the time of the trial. The defendant claimed that it did not violate the ADA and that none of the violations alleged by the plaintiffs were the cause of the fall.

Specials in Evidence

$90,000 $150,000

Damages

The plaintiff's husband claimed damages for emotional distress brought on by witnessing the fall, as well as loss of consortium.

Injuries

The plaintiff suffered a greater trochanteric fracture to her right hip, a rotator cuff tear to her right shoulder, a right wrist sprain, a spinal cord contusion and exacerbation of her lower back condition, and violation of her civil rights as a disabled person.

Result

The case was settled before the Hon. Patricia V. Trumbull for $565,000, including statutory attorney's fees and costs per Civil Code Section 54.3 and Section 505 of the ADA. By a consent decree entered prior to the financial settlement, the university agreed to make entryway, parking areas, and restrooms at the church, which is a public accommodation and symphony concert venue, fully accessible to physicaly disabled persons.

Other Information

The case was settled at a mediation for $565,000.