Chase, Inc. v. Rountree
Appellant, Karl Rountree, filed a disability discrimination complaint against respondent, Chase, Inc., alleging that Chase failed to accommodate him in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, 51, et seq.) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. 12101, et seq.) According to Rountree, architectural barriers in the public restroom at Chases gas station prevented the mirror and the sink from being wheelchair accessible. Rountree did not participate in a scheduled arbitration hearing and thereafter voluntarily dismissed his complaint. Chase then filed the underlying complaint for malicious prosecution against Rountree and appellant Morse Mehrban, Rountrees counsel in the former action. Chase alleged that Rountrees lawsuit was initiated without probable cause and with a malicious and despicable intent. According to Chase, the complaint was simply part of an ongoing predatory scheme by [appellants] to extort money from California small businesses for their own personal gain by abusing a statutory scheme that is designed for corrective action not monetary rewards. The order denying appellants motion to strike the complaint and imposing sanctions is reversed with directions to the superior court to enter a new order granting the Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 motion to strike. Appellants motion for sanctions against respondent on appeal is denied. Costs on appeal are awarded to appellants.
Comments on Chase, Inc. v. Rountree