On May 10, 2016 Governor Brown signed Senate Bill 269 (SB 269) which amends certain California statutes dealing with disability access in public accommodations and business establishments. SB 269 is not a new law, but rather, an effort by the Legislature and Governor Brown to amend existing law in order to address the significant financial hardship that “drive-by” and “technical non-compliance” lawsuits are having on small businesses in California. Both federal and state court dockets in California are inundated with lawsuits filed against small businesses by professional plaintiffs and their attorneys who have created a cottage industry by filing lawsuits for technical violations of federal and state disabled access standards.

California Disability Access Laws – Not the ADA – Allow for Damages.

In addition to Title III of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a disabled individual can bring a claim under California law for denial of full and equal access to a business’ establishment. Existing state law prohibits discrimination on the basis of various specified personal characteristics, including disability. California’s Construction-Related Accessibility Standards Compliance Act establishes standards for making new construction and existing facilities accessible to persons with disabilities and provides for constructionrelated accessibility claims for violations of those standards. Existing law specifies that a violation of construction-related accessibility standards personally encountered by a plaintiff may be sufficient to cause a denial of full and equal access if the plaintiff experienced difficulty, discomfort, or embarrassment because of the violation. Unlike under the ADA which permits the plaintiff to seek only injunctive relief, under California law, a defendant is liable for actual damages plus minimum statutory damages for each instance of discrimination relating to a construction-related accessibility standard. In addition to damages, a successful plaintiff can also recover reasonable attorney’s fees. It is often these statutory attorneys’ fees that are the “tail that wags the dog” and motivate plaintiff’s attorneys to file lawsuits over very technical non-compliance issues.