Lawsuit Forces Closure Of Kids' Basketball Gym

CBS13) RANCHO CORDOVA Amid tears and fond memories, Basketball Town in Rancho Cordova has officially closed after moving out last night.

The company says it can no longer operate because of the high cost of fighting a costly lawsuit brought against the court.

Owners say their financial troubles started when a man claiming to be disabled was at the court to attend his nephew's birthday party being held is an area on the second floor with extra seating. He was reportedly unable to access the area. The employees offered to take him up the stairs or bring the party downstairs. The party was eventually held downstairs at the pizza parlor, but the man decided to sue the court for damages.

The cost of fighting the lawsuit is $100,000.

The company hopes to continue its program at community centers and schools.

This should be filed with the story of lawyer wanting $60 million for his lost pants. Stupid.

or with stories about spiteful assholes.

How big is Rancho Cordova? That guy is going to be real popular.

There's a guy in our small town who did the same sort of thing. He brought a grievance to the city council that the curb cuts at the street corners didn't meet regulations. The council raised taxes, got bids, and started changing every curb cut in the entire town. After they had the project underway, the guy sued the town for being out of compliance, and won. So taxes were raised again to pay the judgement. Guess how popular this guy is?

Results of the 2000 Census

City of Rancho Cordova Demographic Data:

53,718 People
36,030 were White
6,086 were African-American
505 were Native American
4,413 were Asian-American
281 were Pacific Islander
3,024 were Other
3,379 were a combination of two or more races
6,901 were Hispanic
19,987 Households
20,926 Housing Units
The average household size was 2.73

I am an ardent supporter of Equal Access. However, this guy was offered a reasonable accomodation, which he refused. The subsequent lawsuit is difficult to see as anything other than a money grab in light of the employees' willingness to rearrange the situation to allow the gent access. This differs from the hot dog place Rob wrote about in that the proprietors of said establishment did not offer any sort of accomodation.

If there's a way to screw things up for everyone in order to make a buck, you can bet someone will do it.

He sued the company for money?
What an asshole!
Just file an ADA complaint and get them to be compliant... shit like this hurts everyone.
I find it very unsettling when I tell people stories to get them to see my/our POV the first thing out of many people's mouth is "I would sue their ass".
I always say, that would solve what?
Sometimes it gets worse... "well I would be set" or something like that. Sometimes, "teach them a lesson". They don't hear the only people who make any real money are the lawyers and we all end-up paying because insurance premiums go up, so we all pay more for our premiums and products that stores sell to off-set their premiums.
Most don't hear it.
I would only sue in the face of true intentional, continued, negligence or as a last resort and never for my own gain or to the extent of closing something like this.... man what a jerk.

Just file an ADA complaint and get them to be compliant... shit like this hurts everyone.

and what if they don't have the money in the budget to make the building compliant?

I'm not familiar with the specifics of what makes a building compliant but according to the video next to the article, the same services were available upstairs as downstairs, so it would literally make no difference if the party was up or down.

then they should just beat the fucker to death with his wheelchair. problem solved.

lookout123;391606 wrote:

and what if they don't have the money in the budget to make the building compliant?

Then they can't keep their building safe for regular patrons to begin with and would have closed anyway.
A ground floor ramp costs very little.
Have a bake sale.
This also means they are excluding disabled kids.

Bullitt;391635 wrote:

I'm not familiar with the specifics of what makes a building compliant but according to the video next to the article, the same services were available upstairs as downstairs, so it would literally make no difference if the party was up or down.

Then he is just being a dick.
Same service is same service... I must have misread it, I was under the impression that he was unable to attend.

there is no way for him to get to the top floor... unless they carried him, which they offered to do.

But they did move the party to the ground floor, which has the same services.
This guy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

...legally, i mean. *cough*

xoxoxoBruce;391345 wrote:

This should be filed with the story of lawyer wanting $60 million for his lost pants. Stupid.

Actually, that was a judge.:rar:

lookout123;391606 wrote:

and what if they don't have the money in the budget to make the building compliant?

Then they didn't have enough money to be in business in the first place. ADA is not optional, therefore, being compliant is as much a cost of doing business as property taxes, insurance and lease payments.

The video states that because the same services are available upstairs as downstairs, there was no need to put in an elevator to the second floor for those who can't do stairs. The video makes it out to seem like they were in fact compliant, but this dude just has a stick up his ass. Who knows maybe an employee was snotty to him about it and only offered to carry him up or move the event downstairs after lengthy haggling. Given the nature of the person they interviewed though, that seems unlikely.

Elspode;391816 wrote:

Then they didn't have enough money to be in business in the first place. ADA is not optional, therefore, being compliant is as much a cost of doing business as property taxes, insurance and lease payments.

OK, compliant was poor word usage on my part. Check out the rest of the story and ask yourself if this was a business choosing not to comply or a guy who is just being a dick. Identical facilities, up and down, employees offered to take him upstairs. They relocated the party to identical facilities downstairs. No one missed a party or activity because the building didn't have an elevator.

If the downstairs facility is the same and they moved the party there and those facilities are accessible the facility is compliant.
I don't see the issue.
He is a dick.