Talk of The Villages Florida
Page 9 of 24 « First 7 8 9 10 11 19 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Talk of The Villages Florida (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/)
-   The Villages, Florida, General Discussion (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/)
-   -   Lifelong Learning Center (https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/villages-florida-general-discussion-73/lifelong-learning-center-220823/)

golfing eagles 12-04-2016 01:22 PM
This is akin to two neighbors with identical houses and properties. Neighbor A finds out neighbor B's tax assessment is 300K, while his is 450K. He finds this unfair, but instead of going to the assessor to argue that his property is overvalued, he tells him that his neighbor is only assessed at 300K. So the assessor increases his neighbor to 450K. So did he "win"? Was it "fair". Or was he the same whiny 3 year old brat, extending his misfortune to others?

Taltarzac725 12-04-2016 01:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 1329457)
Because it is not necessary to deprive 18,000+ Villagers an amenity that you and 32 others cannot enjoy----but you certainly could have if you had reached a compromise with the LLLC instead of running to your big city lawyers like a whiny little 3 year old brat. That's WHY
Looks like the lawyers in the case do work for the hearing impaired and the plaintiff listed first is a big advocate for the rights of the deaf. Look at his credentials on his Facebook page. They had probably worked together in the past. I do not believe a compromise would have been reached between these two -- the first plaintiff and the Villages' corporation. Both would have stood their ground at whatever the cost to the community at large.

Louis Schwarz --

Quote:
Deaf Advocacy Consultant at Deaf Advocate
President at Tri-County Association of the Deaf
Senior Tax Preparer at DeafTax.com
DeafBowTie
Former Board Member, East Region at GUAA - Gallaudet University Alumni Association
Former Chemist at U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Studied at Gallaudet University
Went to Lane Tech College Prep
Lives in The Villages, Florida
From Chicago, Illinois

TexaninVA 12-04-2016 01:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by rivaridger1 (Post 1329022)
The reality
is most people would prefer the disabled remain behind closed doors and out of sight giving little thought to the fact we all are guaranteed to ultimately face that same eventuality.
Lack of perfection in the real world, or absence of instant solutions to problems, does not equate to a case of evil intent. The reality is most people don't see in the manner described in the above post.

golfing eagles 12-04-2016 01:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taltarzac725 (Post 1329467)
Looks like the lawyers in the case do work for the hearing impaired and the plaintiff listed first is a big advocate for the rights of the deaf. Look at his credentials on his Facebook page. They had probably worked together in the past. I do not believe a compromise would have been reached between these two -- the first plaintiff and the Villages' corporation. Both would have stood their ground at whatever the cost to the community at large.

Louis Schwarz --
So, in other words, it is no longer a question of WHAT he is, just HOW BIG of one.:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

Taltarzac725 12-04-2016 01:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfing eagles (Post 1329475)
So, in other words, it is no longer a question of WHAT he is, just HOW BIG of one.:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:
Right. I just hope that he can come to his senses about how the Villages might be able to accommodate deaf people in the future without suing anyone he sees as being a little unreasonable.

billethkid 12-04-2016 01:58 PM
There are a lot of deaf people in this world that do just fine without having to raise their issue at every drop of the hat.

They learn how to navigate and get along. The also know the world is not based on their inability nor any others.....that is just the way it is.

Well now he and the others coerced into joining him can feel good about disrutpting the lives of thousands because of less than 50.......welcome to the 21st century legal system where the majority loses another one!!

Wavy Chips 12-04-2016 02:18 PM
The original complaint had 35 plaintiffs. one passed away and 2 asked to be removed, leaving the current 32 plaintiffs. So, we have that going for us.

For fun, let's see what the plaintiffs attorneys might have invested so far. Note: this is pure speculation on my part.

There are 6 plaintiff attorneys listed in the suit. Let's say they each charge $1000/hour. Let's also assume that that includes all of their paralegal work and all of their travel, hotels, phone calls memos, and all other expenses. So, all in, $1000/hour per attorney.

Let's assume each attorney spends 100 hours per year on this case.

Let's assume that each attorney only worked a net 5 years out of the 8 total years on this case.

What does that add up to?
$6000 per hour for all the attorneys combined
$600,000 per year in billable fees for the firm
$3,000,000+ in total billable fees for the case in total - and counting.

Given the purported resume of the lead plaintiff, I wonder if he is receiving a finders fee for this case?

sbarron01 12-04-2016 02:46 PM
My husband and I haven't moved to TV yet - 6 more yrs. ADA rules apply to all retirement communities so I suddenly haven't changed my mind about TV due to the closing of the LL college. However, do you think soon-to-be retirees will rethink their plans based on amenities that might not be available once they move? ie. why would I move to TV and pay a monthly fee if the rec centers could potentially close? Why not buy in a community that currently doesn't offer anything and not pay a fee? OK, that's an extreme view but for those of us looking forward to retirement and all the things we'll be doing in the community we buy into, can we still be happy thinking about a future in TV? yes, I'm asking you all to look into the crystal ball and come up with an answer. : )

dbussone 12-04-2016 03:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taltarzac725 (Post 1329477)
Right. I just hope that he can come to his senses about how the Villages might be able to accommodate deaf people in the future without suing anyone he sees as being a little unreasonable.


I doubt it. That doesn't fit his "activist" profile. The lead plaintiff is most likely to continue doing whatever he can until he can finally reach in the deep pocket he so dearly covets.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Carla B 12-04-2016 03:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbarron01 (Post 1329503)
My husband and I haven't moved to TV yet - 6 more yrs. ADA rules apply to all retirement communities so I suddenly haven't changed my mind about TV due to the closing of the LL college. However, do you think soon-to-be retirees will rethink their plans based on amenities that might not be available once they move? ie. why would I move to TV and pay a monthly fee if the rec centers could potentially close? Why not buy in a community that currently doesn't offer anything and not pay a fee? OK, that's an extreme view but for those of us looking forward to retirement and all the things we'll be doing in the community we buy into, can we still be happy thinking about a future in TV? yes, I'm asking you all to look into the crystal ball and come up with an answer. : )
Well, consider that houses in TV are generally more expensive than for similar houses in other nearby retirement communities. The reason promoted is that "you are not buying a house, you are buying the lifestyle." If the lifestyle significantly deteriorates, the reason for paying more in TV goes away.

Bonnevie 12-04-2016 03:19 PM
as always things start out as necessary actions to force change and it's necessary....the intent of the ADA was good...to give access to as many as possible. But as with these things, they seem to morph and become so much more. There are scads of cases brought by people with supposed "disabilities". The deaf community has been especially pro-active but they also seem to relish litigation, and in fact, seek out places to cause litigation. These cases are easily found on the internet. Some of them appear to only be motivated to create a situation to sue. There seems, to me at least, an inherent adversarial nature to their actions, almost militant. The law gives them the ammunition to do this. There is no common sense clause that can be applied to it. It makes liberal minded people like myself understand the recent election results.

outahere 12-04-2016 03:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbussone (Post 1329506)
I doubt it. That doesn't fit his "activist" profile. The lead plaintiff is most likely to continue doing whatever he can until he can finally reach in the deep pocket he so dearly covets.
After his comment, on his Facebook page, about how the LLC "retaliated" against the deaf community in TV, I would have to agree with this. I also don't think he's done yet. The court may have thrown out the argument against the RLGs, but that won't stop him from trying to find a way to go after the rec centers and entertainment, etc. This guy definitely has an "entitled", "it's all about me" attitude, and I don't think anything, or anyone, is going to change it.

mark47 12-04-2016 03:30 PM
I agree Sbarron01 I Planned to buy and move to TV next year. Now having second thoughts

Madelaine Amee 12-04-2016 03:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by billethkid (Post 1329482)
There are a lot of deaf people in this world that do just fine without having to raise their issue at every drop of the hat.
I am married to a hearing impaired person (a severely botched mastoid surgery as a child). It never stopped him doing an international high tech job, and I NEVER hear him complain about being unable to hear unless we are in a very noisy bar or restaurant, he has taught himself to lipread. My Grandfather was completely deaf, you only knew it when he turned off his hearing aid when my Grandmother was nagging him! My brother was hearing impaired and no one every knew it.

The very last thing any of these people would have thought about is suing because they had the misfortune to have a disability. It was just accepted as a fact of life and none of them expected the Government to take care of them.

Am I now reading that their attorneys are going after the school? I do hope I misunderstood that.

vzw1pr 12-04-2016 04:14 PM
The Lifelong Learning College closing - more to the story than whats being told. There are Lifelong Learning Colleges in other states never ever heard of any such a problem. First, getting kicked out of Villages Health Care now this we are not happy Villagers.

TexaninVA 12-04-2016 04:39 PM
Having read all the posts, I’ll summarize some of them and then state where I think we’re at:

• A number of posters in this thread have started to ask whether a lawsuit should be initiated against the 32 plaintiffs?

• While the 32 plaintiffs have lost the first round, they are reported to be continuing on appeal (very disconcerting)

• Most would agree that lawsuits like the Schwarz case are not appealed unless the attorneys see a pot of money at the end. TOTV poster “Wavy Chips” estimates $3million and counting …

• The RLGs were, according to some, initially a target and included in the suit, but later ruled out of bounds, although perhaps only temporarily. (there is some dispute if the RLGs were simply being described or were actually a target per se. Poster “Blueash” says the court rejected claims against them)

• No one knew anything about this issue until the surprise announcement of LLLC’s closure, but realistically, no prudent business (i.e. Developer) is going to announce the particulars of an ongoing lawsuit (i.e. that’s water over the dam.)

• The LLLC is likely gone, and not to return, although volunteer efforts to reconstruct parts of it (using Rec Centers, Churches etc) will probably be made.

• But, the real remaining issue is countering any potential future legal threats against the RLGs, Clubs etc and what constitutes the heart of The Villages’ lifestyle

• The actions of the 32 plaintiffs, regardless of their motivation, has already resulted in significant harm and financial loss to 120,000 residents of TV (ironically enough, plaintiffs included), but seemingly with the potential for much more unless checked.

--Some posters on this board who are contemplating buying in / moving to TV have expressed concern and are now possibly looking elsewhere to retire. Basically, the plaintiffs’ action has now created a noticeable market uncertainty.

--The plaintiffs’ lawsuit has already degraded TV’s lifestyle given it resulted in the loss of LLLC

--However, should the RLGs be successfully attacked, that would mean a major loss, both lifestyle and financial, for the entire community. It would unquestionably impact the market value of all homes in TV in way impossible to currently predict. The impact could potentially be in the range of 10-20%. (to repeat I’m not saying the RLGs will be attacked, but if they were, it would be ugly)

• Related to this latter point, there was an interesting post on another TV forum I noticed, and that I include here because of the opinion expressed:

--“I sent the lawsuit and all the comments with my questions to a family member and thought a couple of comments might be helpful. "Our firm gets almost as many calls from retirees as the most litigious group, prisoners, because they too have a lot of time." His advice to those concerned that the plaintiffs’ lawyers are supposedly saying 'this is not over' and may "spread" to reccenters, etc...."better lawyer up". “

• Given the extensive activist background (per “John W’s post #106) of the chief plaintiff, the track record as best can be pieced together on the boards, an apparent inclination to litigation, and also that the roots of this action goes back a number of years, it’s improbable this is going to be settled by sweet reason alone.

• In sum, a number of posters worry or say the RLG’s are the target, while others say, in effect, we’re safe. I don’t think we can take the risk and simply hope for the best.

Thus, I come to the reluctant conclusion that we have no choice but to seek our own proactive legal protection, given the potential stakes involved. The community would need to pitch in and fund it (GoFundMe accounts or whatever). Perhaps the old football adage applies in this instance: offense is the best defense?

The best course forward is still TBD … maybe a retired lawyer with a track record who lives here, or the HOA or POA could take the leadership role? (The POA would probably have the most credibility.) But, it now seems prudent to start marshaling legal forces of our own in whatever manner is deemed best. There is also the issue for our lawyers to consider of what, if any, legal exposure the 32 plaintiffs may now have, or could have in the future.

.

dbussone 12-04-2016 04:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexaninVA (Post 1329547)
Having read all the posts, I’ll summarize some of them and then state where I think we’re at:



•A number of posters in this thread have started to ask whether a lawsuit should be initiated against the 32 plaintiffs?



•While the 32 plaintiffs have lost the first round, they are reported to be continuing on appeal (very disconcerting)



•Most would agree that lawsuits like the Schwarz case are not appealed unless the attorneys see a pot of money at the end. TOTV poster “Wavy Chips” estimates $3million and counting …



•The RLGs were, according to some, initially a target and included in the suit, but later ruled out of bounds, although perhaps only temporarily. (there is some dispute if the RLGs were simply being described or were actually a target per se. Poster “Blueash” says the court rejected claims against them)



•No one knew anything about this issue until the surprise announcement of LLLC’s closure, but realistically, no prudent business (i.e. Developer) is going to announce the particulars of an ongoing lawsuit (i.e. that’s water over the dam.)



•The LLLC is likely gone, and not to return, although volunteer efforts to reconstruct parts of it (using Rec Centers, Churches etc) will probably be made.



•But, the real remaining issue is countering any potential future legal threats against the RLGs, Clubs etc and what constitutes the heart of The Villages’ lifestyle



•The actions of the 32 plaintiffs, regardless of their motivation, has already resulted in significant harm and financial loss to 120,000 residents of TV (ironically enough, plaintiffs included), but seemingly with the potential for much more unless checked.



--Some posters on this board who are contemplating buying in / moving to TV have expressed concern and are now possibly looking elsewhere to retire. Basically, the plaintiffs’ action has now created a noticeable market uncertainty.



--The plaintiffs’ lawsuit has already degraded TV’s lifestyle given it resulted in the loss of LLLC



--However, should the RLGs be successfully attacked, that would mean a major loss, both lifestyle and financial, for the entire community. It would unquestionably impact the market value of all homes in TV in way impossible to currently predict. The impact could potentially be in the range of 10-20%. (to repeat I’m not saying the RLGs will be attacked, but if they were, it would be ugly)



•Related to this latter point, there was an interesting post on another TV forum I noticed, and that I include here because of the opinion expressed:



--“I sent the lawsuit and all the comments with my questions to a family member and thought a couple of comments might be helpful. "Our firm gets almost as many calls from retirees as the most litigious group, prisoners, because they too have a lot of time." His advice to those concerned that the plaintiffs’ lawyers are supposedly saying 'this is not over' and may "spread" to reccenters, etc...."better lawyer up". “



•Given the extensive activist background (per “John W’s post #106) of the chief plaintiff, the track record as best can be pieced together on the boards, an apparent inclination to litigation, and also that the roots of this action goes back a number of years, it’s improbable this is going to be settled by sweet reason alone.



•In sum, a number of posters worry or say the RLG’s are the target, while others say, in effect, we’re safe. I don’t think we can take the risk and simply hope for the best.



Thus, I come to the reluctant conclusion that we have no choice but to seek our own proactive legal protection, given the potential stakes involved. The community would need to pitch in and fund it (GoFundMe accounts or whatever). Perhaps the old football adage applies in this instance: offense is the best defense?



The best course forward is still TBD … maybe a retired lawyer with a track record who lives here, or the HOA or POA could take the leadership role? (The POA would probably have the most credibility.) But, it now seems prudent to start marshaling legal forces of our own in whatever manner is deemed best. There is also the issue for our lawyers to consider of what, if any, legal exposure the 32 plaintiffs may now have, or could have in the future.



.


An excellent and concise summary. I proposed earlier, perhaps on another similar thread, that a gofundme account might be appropriate to begin raising money. Your last sentence speaks directly to a position I have taken on a number of occasions. Go on the attack when you are dealing with plaintiffs who are being unreasonable. My educated guess is that few on the list of this action would ever dream they might be personally sued and held liable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Bonnevie 12-04-2016 05:08 PM
I really wish we knew what the appeal is that's scheduled in Atlanta later in the December court. I really worry it's the RLGs.

Wavy Chips 12-04-2016 05:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexaninVA (Post 1329547)
Having read all the posts, I’ll summarize some of them and then state where I think we’re at: . . . . .


• Most would agree that lawsuits like the Schwarz case are not appealed unless the attorneys see a pot of money at the end. TOTV poster “Wavy Chips” estimates $3million and counting …


. . . . . The best course forward is still TBD … maybe a retired lawyer with a track record who lives here, or the HOA or POA could take the leadership role? (The POA would probably have the most credibility.) But, it now seems prudent to start marshaling legal forces of our own in whatever manner is deemed best. There is also the issue for our lawyers to consider of what, if any, legal exposure the 32 plaintiffs may now have, or could have in the future.

.
Very good points, but to clarify, my estimate is purely speculation, but if I speculate further I actually think that number is higher. In addition, the Developer beat the IRS to protect it's "financial lifestyle" at a time where conservative groups were under attack by the IRS. I have no doubt that the Developer/School et.al. can go toe to toe with this situation to protect its "residents lifestyle" and prevail - how ever long it takes. Now that this is out in the open, there will be thousands of Villagers following every inch of this case. Once the December hearing is over, we will obviously know where we are headed.

Might be a good time for an LLC class to take a road trip to see first hand how our legal system works at the U.S. District Court level. Hmmmm.

theorem painter 12-04-2016 06:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnevie (Post 1329561)
I really wish we knew what the appeal is that's scheduled in Atlanta later in the December court. I really worry it's the RLGs.
I am only guessing but I would say it is for monetary damages for the LLLC not providing interpreters.

Cisco Kid 12-04-2016 06:35 PM
I wonder how many disabilities types are within TV, and how many accommodations we can come up with to sue for. WHY NOT !!!!:D:D

Bonnevie 12-04-2016 06:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by theorem painter (Post 1329587)
I am only guessing but I would say it is for monetary damages for the LLLC not providing interpreters.
no, they won that motion. they were denied the RLGs motion.

Mleeja 12-04-2016 07:58 PM
Wow! Did anyone see 60 Minutes tonight. Segment about lawyers filing ADA lawsuits. Florida is one of two states that allow cash awards for ADA suits. Could help explain why LLC closed the doors. I would be worried about all the pools not being ADA compliant!

Bonnevie 12-04-2016 08:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mleeja (Post 1329604)
Wow! Did anyone see 60 Minutes tonight. Segment about lawyers filing ADA lawsuits. Florida is one of two states that allow cash awards for ADA suits. Could help explain why LLC closed the doors. I would be worried about all the pools not being ADA compliant!
I did see it and noted that Florida is a prime place for lawsuits because it allows compensation. So perhaps we all need to contact our state legislators and say we want the law changed. Of course, winning of such suits by the plaintiffs should require compliance but compensatory and punitive damages should no longer be awarded. Then maybe the suits will truly be about righting a wrong, not lining pockets. I intend to write to my representative tomorrow requesting this change.

Taltarzac725 12-04-2016 08:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnevie (Post 1329609)
I did see it and noted that Florida is a prime place for lawsuits because it allows compensation. So perhaps we all need to contact our state legislators and say we want the law changed. Of course, winning of such suits by the plaintiffs should require compliance but compensatory and punitive damages should no longer be awarded. Then maybe the suits will truly be about righting a wrong, not lining pockets. I intend to write to my representative tomorrow requesting this change.
That's a good idea. And they should make the Federal law more simple so that business people can understand it. Some of these people who write laws seem to have lost all their common sense and reasonableness. Some of the case decisions I have read are even worse in that regard.

These lawyers, though, are basically ambulance chasers of the 2000s and 2010s. Very predatory it looked like.

theorem painter 12-04-2016 08:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnevie (Post 1329590)
no, they won that motion. they were denied the RLGs motion.
Yes, they did win it and usually the next step is for the Court to decide if the plaintiffs deserve monetary compensation.

YouNeverKnow 12-04-2016 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mleeja (Post 1329604)
Wow! Did anyone see 60 Minutes tonight. Segment about lawyers filing ADA lawsuits. Florida is one of two states that allow cash awards for ADA suits. Could help explain why LLC closed the doors. I would be worried about all the pools not being ADA compliant!
What's a "drive-by lawsuit"? - CBS News Here's a link to the story. Sad statement that greed is the motivating factor for some people.

dbussone 12-04-2016 08:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonnevie (Post 1329609)
I did see it and noted that Florida is a prime place for lawsuits because it allows compensation. So perhaps we all need to contact our state legislators and say we want the law changed. Of course, winning of such suits by the plaintiffs should require compliance but compensatory and punitive damages should no longer be awarded. Then maybe the suits will truly be about righting a wrong, not lining pockets. I intend to write to my representative tomorrow requesting this change.


Good luck with that. I wonder how many attorneys populate the legislature. It's kind of like Congress on a lesser scale.

NotGolfer 12-04-2016 09:59 PM
We saw the 60 Minutes piece and both of us commented on it sounding JUST LIKE what happened here. Just don't have words to add to this....but despicable comes to mind!!

Taltarzac725 12-04-2016 10:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotGolfer (Post 1329647)
We saw the 60 Minutes piece and both of us commented on it sounding JUST LIKE what happened here. Just don't have words to add to this....but despicable comes to mind!!
It seems very different from what happened here in the Villages unless there is a lot more to the story. The judge did not think so. And most judges seem rather fair except for those playing mind games like some on the US Supreme Court.

Northwoods 12-04-2016 10:51 PM
My question is... how are the NY lawyers going to get paid? I can't see them walking away from an 8 year lawsuit. I believe they took this on because they saw some monetary reason to do it. So... if the LLC shuts down, how do they get paid? My fear is that they will go after the Charter School. If that happens it will be devastating to The Villages. Think about it.... waiters, doctors, nurses, hairdressers, contractors, laborers.... many work here because that Charter school is a huge draw to attracting a good workforce. The Charter School was a brilliant move by The Villages Leadership and a huge draw to attract a highly-skilled workforce. You take away that benefit and there is no incentive for many of the workforce infrastructure to stay here. Someone tell me that can't happen...

dbussone 12-04-2016 10:58 PM
Lifelong Learning Center
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northwoods (Post 1329655)
My question is... how are the NY lawyers going to get paid? I can't see them walking away from an 8 year lawsuit. I believe they took this on because they saw some monetary reason to do it. So... if the LLC shuts down, how do they get paid? My fear is that they will go after the Charter School. If that happens it will be devastating to The Villages. Think about it.... waiters, doctors, nurses, hairdressers, contractors, laborers.... many work here because that Charter school is a huge draw to attracting a good workforce. The Charter School was a brilliant move by The Villages Leadership and a huge draw to attract a highly-skilled workforce. You take away that benefit and there is no incentive for many of the workforce infrastructure to stay here. Someone tell me that can't happen...


They will get paid if they are successful in having the court order payment of their proposed fees

Northwoods 12-04-2016 11:05 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbussone (Post 1329657)
They will get paid if they are successful in having the court pay their proposed fees
But what does that mean. Who is going to pay those fees? If it appears that The Villages is going to get strapped with that payment because the plaintiffs are naming The Charter School in their lawsuit, couldn't they shut down The Charter School to avoid a massive payout?

dbussone 12-04-2016 11:13 PM
Lifelong Learning Center
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northwoods (Post 1329658)
But what does that mean. Who is going to pay those fees? If it appears that The Villages is going to get strapped with that payment because the plaintiffs are naming The Charter School in their lawsuit, couldn't they shut down The Charter School to avoid a massive payout?


I don't want to think that far ahead. But keep in mind that the attorneys are paid on a contingency. Since the 8 year approach didn't work, they will most likely petition the court to ask the defendant to pay their outrageous fees.

Northwoods 12-04-2016 11:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbussone (Post 1329659)
I don't want to think that far ahead. But keep in mind that the attorneys are paid on a contingency. Since the 8 year approach didn't work, they will most likely petition the court to ask the defendant to pay their outrageous fees.
I wish that the plaintiffs could be liable for a portion of their fees. Only because... it would make them more mindful of the action. If you can file a lawsuit but know you will never have to pay anything... that is so easy. IF they had more skin in the game... would they have thought through their decisions a little more?

dbussone 12-05-2016 12:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northwoods (Post 1329662)
I wish that the plaintiffs could be liable for a portion of their fees. Only because... it would make them more mindful of the action. If you can file a lawsuit but know you will never have to pay anything... that is so easy. IF they had more skin in the game... would they have thought through their decisions a little more?


We certainly agree on that.

banjobob 12-05-2016 05:33 AM
Just curious as to how many totally or partially deaf people live in and enroll in the learning college in The Villages or is this just about the money , the article stated a New York law firm? is filing the suit. Nothing wrong with advocating for a cause if a real need was evident. I wonder how many individual complaints were voiced and what was actually done with those complaints . Maybe just a zealot bolstering an ego!

T-325 12-05-2016 05:39 AM
Interesting link

http://www.mass.gov/eohhs/docs/mcdhh...ns-medical.rtf

----------------
ADA Title III Places of Public Accommodation
A pharmacy, insurance office, professional office of a health care provider, hospital, or other service establishment are considered ‘places of public accommodation’ meaning a facility, operated by a private entity, whose operations effect commerce. Doctor’s offices and nursing homes are covered under Title III. Congregate care facilities, independent living centers and retirement communities are covered by Title III, if, they provide significant enough level of social services that they can be considered social service establishments. Social services in this context include medical care, assistance with daily living activities, provision of meals, transportation, counseling and organized recreational activities.
-----------------

key question/key interpretation .. 2000 plus clubs

the Rec centers provide space..they don't organize activities... or do they?

that may be the question

rubicon 12-05-2016 06:07 AM
60 minutes had a segment on attorneys filing bogus lawsuits under ADA all over the country. wonder if this lawsuit has application here?

Personal Best Regards:

Soccermom 12-05-2016 06:09 AM
Anybody see 60 minutes last night? Don't know, but looks like this could be a Drive-by or Google lawsuit.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:54 PM.
Page 9 of 24 « First 7 8 9 10 11 19 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.32 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.