Am I reading this wrong?

[Taxing Matters]

I'm sorry if I sound like I'm trying to simplify the many years of education that it takes to be qualified to be a lawyer, I'm not. I just want to understand best I can becuase this is a response I am filing and if I go to court I want to be able to explain myself with confidence. Thank you so much for your help.

So where are you seeing these things? Are you looking at defendant answers in other cases and trying to find things that you could use in your own case?

 

[briana.askew]

The defendant must comply with all of the laws and regulations that apply to everyone and the Unruh claim cannot interfere with the defendant's ability to comply with these laws and regulations.

But how would the Unruh claim interfere with the defendant's ability to comply?

 

[briana.askew]

So where are you seeing these things? Are you looking at defendant answers in other cases and trying to find things that you could use in your own case?

yes

 

[quincy]

Ok, sorry, what does this mean also? "Plaintiff’s claims for damages in the Complaint are barred in whole or in part because Plaintiff’s injury or injuries, if any, was/were caused by third parties acting outside the scope of agency, employment or control of Defendant."

Does this mean the complaints are barred because the injury was caused by a third party acting on their own accord?

A defendant cannot be held responsible for persons and property over which he has no control.

 

[quincy]

Ok I have two new questions...

first: My business rents a space in a building with a common parking lot maintained by the building owner. The parking lot has not been renovated or upgraded since before 2008. Are they subject to litigation if they do not include the "$250 fine" warning signs as directed by the July 2008 changes to ADA requirements or are they exempt because they have not made renovations or changes to the parking lot since 2008?

If the parking lot and parking spaces have not changed since July1, 2008 (no renovations, no upgrades) and the signs that were present before July 1, 2008, are the same signs present today, the "$250 fine" does not have to appear on the sign.

Here is a link to the law:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=22511.8

 

[quincy]

But how would the Unruh claim interfere with the defendant's ability to comply?

I suppose an example could be a defendant's compliance with a fire code or zoning laws that apply equally to everyone and would otherwise be violated.

 

[quincy]

Although the following link is to the California Restaurant Association and I know you are not a restaurant, the suggestions offered by the Association on defending against an ADA accessibility claim might (or might not ) be of some help to you.

https://www.calrest.org/ada/defending-title-iii-ada-accessibility-claim