Molski v. M.J. Cable, Inc.

Jarek Molski (plaintiff) was a paraplegic who required a wheelchair to move. Molski had filed hundreds of lawsuits against businesses for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California state law, earning thousands of dollars through settlements and successful state-law claims. Molski visited a restaurant owned by M.J. Cable, Inc. (Cable) (defendant) and encountered several architectural barriers that denied him access to the restaurant’s facilities. Molski brought in an expert investigator who confirmed that the restaurant had architectural features that did not comply with the ADA’s accessibility regulations. Molski filed suit against Cable, alleging violations of the ADA and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (Unruh Act). At trial, the testimony of Molski, his investigator, and Cable’s vice president established that accessibility barriers existed in the restaurant and that Cable had not attempted to identify or remove the barriers. Cable focused on Molski’s litigation history at trial, discussing lawsuit frequency and Molski’s earnings from the proceedings. At the trial’s conclusion, the district court issued a verdict form to the jury. The form first asked whether Cable failed to identify and remove the restaurant’s architectural barriers. If the jury answered yes, the form instructed the jury to answer follow-up questions, including whether the removal of the identified barriers was readily achievable. The jury answered no to the threshold question, returning a verdict for Cable. Molski moved for a new trial, and the court denied the motion. Explaining its decision, the court stated that the jury likely considered Molski a business rather than an individual due to his frequent litigation, making him unable to recover under the ADA. Molski appealed to the Ninth Circuit.