More on Jarek Molski (Pun Intended)
Army Lawyer sheds further light on Jarek Molski, the vexatious ADA litigant highlighted in my post yesterday. Army Lawyer quotes us a passage from a federal decision that gives us all a bit more insight into the deceitful scumbag this fellow is:
For example, in Molski v. El 7 Mares Restaurant, Case No. C04-1882 (N.D. Cal. 2004), Molski claims that, on May 20, 2003, he and significant other, Brygida Molski, attended the El 7 Mares Restaurant for the purposes of dining out. Molski alleges that the restaurant lacked adequate handicapped parking, and that the food counter was too high. After the meal, Molski attempted to use the restroom, but because the toilet’s grab bars were improperly installed, he injured his shoulders in the process of transferring himself from his wheelchair to the toilet. Thereafter, he was unable to wash his hands because of the lavatory’s design.
Although this complaint appears credible standing alone, its validity is undermined when viewed alongside Molski’s other complaints. In Molski v. Casa De Fruta, L.P., Case No. C04-1981 (N.D. Cal. 2004), Molski alleges that he sustained nearly identical injuries on the exact same day, May 20, 2003. In Casa de Fruta, Molski alleges that he and significant other, Brygida Molski, patronized Casa de Fruta for the purpose of wine tasting. On arrival, Molski was again unable to locate van accessible parking. Once inside, Molski again found the counter to be too high. After wine tasting, Molski again decided to use the restroom, and again, injured his upper extremities while in the process of transferring himself to the toilet. Thereafter, he was once again unable to wash his hands due to the design of the lavatory.
This was, apparently, not the end of Molski’s day. In Molski v. Rapazzini Winery, Case No. C04-1881 (N.D. Cal. 2004), Molski once again alleges that he sustained nearly identical injuries on the exact same day, May 20, 2003. Molski, again accompanied by Brygida Molski, claims he visited the Rapazzini Winery for the purpose of wine tasting. Again, Molski complains that the parking lot lacked adequate handicapped van accessible parking. Upon entering the establishment, he discovered that the counter was too high. After tasting wine, he again needed to use the restroom. In the course of transferring himself from his wheelchair to the toilet, he injured himself yet again. Thereafter, he was again unable to wash his hands due to the lavatory’s design.
The Court is tempted to exclaim: “what a lousy day!” It would be highly unusual — to say the least — for anyone to sustain two injuries, let alone three, in a single day, each of which necessitated a separate federal lawsuit. But in Molski’s case, May 20, 2003, was simply business as usual. Molski filed 13 separate complaints for essentially identical injuries sustained between May 19, 2003 and May 23, 2003. The Court simply does not believe that Molski suffered 13 nearly identical injuries, generally to the same part of his body, in the course of performing the same activity, over a five-day period. This is to say nothing of the hundreds of other lawsuits Molski has filed over the last four years, many of which make nearly identical allegations. The record before this Court leads it to conclude that these suits were filed maliciously, in order to extort a cash settlement.
The decision is Molski v. Mandarin Touch Rest., 347 F. Supp. 2d 860. Thanks to Army Lawyer.
Simpsons fans will inevitably be reminded of the classic Mongomery Burns quote:
Three misfortunes, that’s possible. Seven misfortunes, there’s an outside chance. But nine misfortunes? I’d like to see that!
How about thirteen, Mr. Burns?
Hahahaha… that’s an awesome title. Pun intended. I had to read it three times.
I really think lawsuits should have a bit more potential cost for the filer, at least when it turns out someone does it for a living or is really reaching on something. Otherwise, why not keep filing forever?
It’s only a matter of time before he finds a sympathetic judge who doesn’t use google, right?David N. Scott (71e316) — 3/27/2007 @ 12:46 am
Another greedy scoundrel who should be made to pay back every cent this reptile sued forkrazy kagu (2f4b46) — 3/27/2007 @ 6:14 am
careful now, I hear his lawyer is looking for a way to apply ADA to Blog-meisters who pun without making allowances for the humor imparedquasimodo (edc74e) — 3/27/2007 @ 6:33 am
I’m an Architect and the ADA is a unique part of model building codes. The ADA is not a building code but a public law. It has, however, been adopted by the national model codes. What’s unique about the ADA is that Architects and their clients can be sued by a member of the public for technical non-compliance issues including those in the post.
As far as I know, there is no relief by acquiring the necessary permits and certificates for occupancy from the Authority Having Jurisdiction or designing and constructing the building to comply with codes and ordinances to “the best of my knowledge” and within “reasonable and accepted professional standards”. All it takes is one complaint and off to court you go. Correct me if I’m wrong.
It’s unfortunate that the ADA has created a cottage industry for people like Mr. Molski.Curtiss (c03bd7) — 3/27/2007 @ 6:39 am
“Three misfortunes, that’s possible. Seven misfortunates, there’s an outside chance. But nine misfortunes? I’d like to see that!”
Harr. I wonder if Ken Griffey, Jr. was ever cured of his gigantism.Leviticus (43095b) — 3/27/2007 @ 7:32 am
Our nanny state “no victim left behind” attitude creates laws like the ADA that are awash with good intentions [Who could be against making access to public or commercial places available to all?]. But it leads to some ridiculous consequences, such as Mr. Molski’s $800 K per year career as an “enforcer” of the ADA.
I live at the top of a fairly steep canyon in the Verdugo Hills; a few years back the City of Glendale–in response to the ADA put in new sidewalk corners at each intersection with wheel chair ramps; apparently there is also a requirement that said wheelchair ramps be put in the middle of a block if there’s too great a distance between the street corners. Suffice it to say that we now ramps at all the corners and in the middle of the blocks on a hill that has a 10% grade and is 2/5 of a mile long with a couple of curves as it comes up the canyon. If Grandma ever ventures out on the sidewalk or the street in her wheelchair, we’ll be wiping up the carnage at the bottom of the hill—but we’ve got ramps, oh boy, we’ve got ramps–and our city fathers know (or hope) that they’re in compliance with the ADA. Maybe Mr. Molski can come try those ramps out?Mike Myers (4a5728) — 3/27/2007 @ 7:36 am
Suffice it to say that we now ramps at all the corners and in the middle of the blocks on a hill that has a 10% grade and is 2/5 of a mile long with a couple of curves as it comes up the canyon. If Grandma ever ventures out on the sidewalk or the street in her wheelchair, we’ll be wiping up the carnage at the bottom of the hill—but we’ve got ramps, oh boy, we’ve got ramps–and our city fathers know (or hope) that they’re in compliance with the ADA. Maybe Mr. Molski can come try those ramps out?
Lock up your tax dollars, man! If Mr. Molski comes to your neighborhood we are looking at a 24-hour city run shuttle service in that canyon!
Yours,Wince and Nod (931cf0) — 3/27/2007 @ 12:28 pm
This guy is a sleazbag and deserves to be disbarred.
However, I will say from experience that the height of most grab bars seems set at helping people who can walk to sit down and get up not for assisting those in wheel chairs.davod (09ab4f) — 3/27/2007 @ 2:43 pm
This guy is more than a sleazebag. He has armed himself with the awesome power of the state to take someone else’s hard earned money by way of obvious lies. He deserves to spend the rest of his life in jail.SPO (62ca0c) — 3/27/2007 @ 3:19 pm
As was said more than once on the frontier:Another Drew (8018ee) — 3/27/2007 @ 5:30 pm
He needs to be horse-shipped, ’cause hangin’s too good for him.
Another Drew #10:
I like Henry Fonda’s line from “Once Upon A Time In The West” to Gabriele Ferzetti: “Compete with me? You can’t even stand on your own two feet.” Then kicks his crutches out from under him.nk (54955a) — 3/27/2007 @ 5:43 pm
In the White Mountains in New Hampshire there is a sequence of “huts” at the top of 7,000+ ft mountains, for use by backpackers.
Recently these were remodeled to have wheelchair ramps.
My thinking is that if someone in a wheelchair can climb a 7,000 ft mountain, they can make it up two steps without a ramp.
The Boston Globe covered the unveiling, where a disabled person was basically carried up the mountain by other people, then allowed to roll up the ramp, as some sort of triumph of compassion and decency.
I saw it as a pathetic example of moral decay.TJIC (250836) — 3/28/2007 @ 9:34 am
That’s a lot of trips to the toilet in one day!Ken (245846) — 3/28/2007 @ 7:21 pm
7,000 ft… Ha! That’s a foothill! I live at (approx) 7,000 ft.
Feel the wrath of the Highlanders, pathetic New Hamshirites.Leviticus (3c2c59) — 3/29/2007 @ 7:43 am
New York City, a new firestation, 2 story in the traditional design (everything open to the public is on the first floor, 2nd floor has bunks, kitchen, lounge for the firefighters to wait for a call-out, elevator required by law solely for the convenience of wheelchair-bound firefighters.markm (e85b25) — 4/1/2007 @ 3:01 am