1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

Civil Action Number:

JESUS GONZALEZ

Plaintiff,

vs.

LA CUCINA MANAGEMENT, INC. 

d/b/a Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe and 

CORAL WAY PARTNERS LLC 

Defendants.

/

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Plaintiff Jesus Gonzalez, by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby sues 

Defendant La Cucina Management, Inc. doing business as Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe 

and Defendant Coral Way Partners LLC for injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§§12181-12189 of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and 28 C.F.R. Part 36 and 

alleges:

JURISDICTION

1. This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to Title III of 

the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) 42 U.S.C. §§12181-12189. This Court is 

vested with original jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §1331.

2. Venue is proper in the Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b) in that all 

events giving rise to this lawsuit occurred within the Southern District of Florida and the 

subject premises is located within the jurisdiction of this Court.

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 1 of 11
2

3. Defendant La Cucina Management, Inc. and Defendant Coral Way Partners 

LLC are authorized to conduct, and are conducting, business within the State of Florida and 

within the jurisdiction of this court. 

PARTIES

4. Plaintiff Jesus Gonzalez (“Plaintiff”) is a resident of the state of Florida. 

Plaintiff has a “qualified disability” under the ADA as he is disabled with neuropathy and 

nerve damage due to radiation and utilizes a wheelchair for mobility. Plaintiff’s disability is 

defined in 42 U.S.C. §12102(1)(A)(2), 28 C.F.R. §36.105(b)(2) and 28 C.F.R. 

§36.105(2)(iii)(D). Plaintiff is also a “tester” to determine whether public accommodations 

are in compliance with the ADA/ADAAG.

5. Defendant La Cucina Management, Inc. (also referenced as “Defendant La 

Cucina,” “operator,” or “lessee”) is a Florida for profit corporation and owner and operator 

of Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe.

6. Defendant Coral Way Partners LLC (also referenced as “Defendant Coral 

Way,” “owner,” or “lessor”) is a Florida limited liability company which is the owner of 

commercial real property identified as Folio 01-4138-001-2070, with the post address of 

1700 3rd Avenue, Miami, Florida 33129 which is built out as a restaurant operating as the 

subject Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe.

FACTS

7. At all times material hereto, Defendant Coral Way has leased its commercial 

property to Defendant La Cucina who in turn has operated (and continues to operate) its 

Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe within that leased space.

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 2 of 11
3

8. Defendant La Cucina’s Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe is a well-established 

restaurant which serves Italian-American cuisine located at 1700 3rd Avenue, Miami, 

Florida 33129 and is open to the general public. As such, it is a place of public 

accommodation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12181(7)(B) as “[A] restaurant, bar, or other 

establishment serving food or drink.” Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe is also referred to as 

“Perricone’s Marketplace restaurant,” “Perricone’s (restaurant),” “restaurant,” or “Place of 

Public Accommodation.”

9. As the owner/operator of a restaurant which is open to the public, Defendant 

La Cucina is defined as a “Public Accommodation" within meaning of Title III because it is 

a private entity which owns, or operates a restaurant; 42 U.S.C. §12182, §12181(7)(B) and 

28 C.F.R. §36.104(2).

10. Due to the close proximity to Plaintiff’s home to Perricone’s Marketplace & 

Café, on July 25, 2022, Plaintiff personally visited the restaurant to purchase a meal and 

dine therein and to test for compliance with the ADA/ADAAG.

11. Due to the fact that he perambulates with the assistance of a wheelchair, 

Plaintiff met barriers to access while testing/dining within the restaurant. 

12. Based on the access impediments Plaintiff encountered, Plaintiff has been 

denied full and equal access by the operator of Perricone’s restaurant (Defendant La Cucina) 

and by the owner of the commercial property which houses the restaurant (Defendant Coral 

Way).

13. As the owner and operator of Perricone’s restaurant, Defendant La Cucina is 

aware of the ADA and the need to provide for equal access in all areas of its restaurant. 

Therefore, its failure to reasonably accommodate mobility impaired and disabled patrons by 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 3 of 11
4

insuring that its restaurant is fully accessible is/was willful, malicious, and oppressive and in 

complete disregard for the Civil Rights of the Plaintiff and in violation of 28 C.F.R. 

§36.302.

14. As the owner of commercial property which is built out and utilized as a 

restaurant open to the general public, Defendant Coral Way is also defined as a “Public 

Accommodation" within meaning of Title III; 42 U.S.C. §12182, §12181(7)(B) and 28 

C.F.R. §36.104(2). 

15. As the owner of commercial property used as a Place of Public 

Accommodation, Defendant Coral Way is aware of the ADA and the need to provide for 

equal access in all areas of its commercial property which are open to the public. Failure to 

reasonably accommodate mobility impaired and disabled patrons by insuring that its 

property is fully accessible is/was willful, malicious, and oppressive and in complete 

disregard for the Civil Rights of the Plaintiff and in violation of 28 C.F.R. §36.302.

16. As a result of the joint and several discrimination by Defendants, Plaintiff 

has suffered loss of dignity, mental anguish and other tangible injuries and has suffered an 

injury-in-fact.

17. Plaintiff continues to desire to patronize and/or test Perricone’s restaurant, 

but continues to be injured in that he continues to be discriminated against due to the 

barriers to access within that restaurant which are in violation of the ADA.

18. Any and all requisite notice has been provided. 

19. Plaintiff has been obligated to retain the civil rights law office of J. Courtney 

Cunningham, PLLC and has agreed to pay a reasonable fee for services in the prosecution of 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 4 of 11
5

this cause, including costs and expenses incurred. Plaintiff is entitled to recover those 

attorney’s fees, costs and expenses from Defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12205.

COUNT I – VIOLATIONS OF TITLE III OF THE ADA

20. The ADA was enacted and effective as of July 26, 1990 and ADA legislation 

has been protecting disabled persons from discrimination due to disabilities since that time. 

Over 30 years have passed since enactment of the ADA, public accommodations and places 

of public accommodation have had adequate time for compliance. 

21. Congress explicitly stated that the purpose of the ADA was to:

(i) provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the 

elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities;

(ii) provide clear, strong, consistent, enforceable standards addressing 

discrimination against individuals with disabilities; and,

(iii) invoke the sweep of congressional authority, including the power to 

enforce the fourteenth amendment and to regulate commerce, in 

order to address the major areas of discrimination faced on a daily 

by people with disabilities.

42 U.S.C. §12101(b)(1)(2) and (4).

22. Prior to the filing of this lawsuit, Plaintiff personally visited Perricone’s 

restaurant with the intention of patronizing that restaurant to enjoy a meal and/or test the 

public accommodation for compliance with the ADA/ADAAG; however, Plaintiff was 

denied adequate accommodation because, as a disabled individual who utilizes a wheelchair 

for mobility, Plaintiff met barriers to access. Therefore, Plaintiff has suffered an injury in 

fact. 

23. Defendant Coral Way and Defendant La Cucina have discriminated (and 

continue to discriminate) against Plaintiff by denying full and equal access to, and full and 

equal enjoyment of, goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations 

at Perricone’s restaurant in derogation of 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq. and as prohibited by 42 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 5 of 11
6

U.S.C. §12182 et seq. by failing to remove barriers to access pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§12182(b)(2)(a)(iv), where such removal is readily achievable. 

24. Plaintiff has been unable to, and continues to be unable to, enjoy full and 

equal safe access to, and the benefits of, all the accommodations and services offered at 

Perricone’s restaurant. 

25. Defendants are jointly and singularly governed by the ADA and must be in 

compliance therewith. However, Defendants have discriminated against disabled patrons in 

derogation of 28 C.F.R. Part 36.

26. Pursuant to the mandates of 42 U.S.C. §12134(a), on July 26, 1991 (as 

amended), the Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, promulgated Federal 

Regulations to implement the requirements of the ADA, known as the Americans with 

Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (hereinafter “ADAAG”), 28 C.F.R. Part 36, under 

which said Department may obtain civil penalties of up to $75,000 for the first violation and 

$150,000 for any subsequent violation.

27. Defendant Coral Way’s property, which houses Defendant La Cucina’s

restaurant, is in violation of 42 U.S.C. §12181 et seq., the ADA and 28 C.F.R. §36.302 et 

seq., and both Defendants are discriminating against the Plaintiff as a result of inter alia, the 

following specific violations: 

i. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), the interior seating area 

of the restaurant does not comply with the standards prescribed in Section 4.32 of 

the ADAAG and Sections 226 and 902 of the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible 

Design. 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 6 of 11
7

ii. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), Plaintiff was unable to 

sit in the interior of the restaurant and enjoy a meal due to the fact that the restaurant 

has not provided a sufficient number of interior accessible dining seating and 

surfaces, which is in violation of Section 5.1 of the ADAAG and Section 226 of the 

2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Section 5.1 requires (wheelchair) 

access for a minimum of 5% of fixed or built-in tables distributed throughout dining 

areas. The required clear width (36 inches minimum) is specified for the clearance 

between the edges of fixed tables or between table edges and walls. Section 

226.1 requires that, where dining surfaces are provided for the consumption of food 

or drink, at least five percent (5%) of the dining seating and standing spaces.

iii. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way 

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), the exterior seating area 

of the restaurant does not comply with the standards prescribed in Section 4.32 of 

the ADAAG and Sections 226 and 902 of the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible 

Design.

iv. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way 

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), the restaurant exterior 

seating area does not contain a sufficient number of accessible dining seating and 

surfaces which is in violation of Section 5.1 of the ADAAG and Section 226 of the 

2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Section 5.1 requires (wheelchair) 

access for a minimum of 5% of fixed or built-in tables distributed throughout dining 

areas. The required clear width (36 inches minimum) is specified for the clearance 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 7 of 11
8

between the edges of fixed tables or between table edges and walls. Section 

226.1 requires that, where dining surfaces are provided for the consumption of food 

or drink, at least five percent (5%) of the dining seating and standing spaces

v. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally, there are permanently 

designated interior spaces without proper signage. At the men’s restroom, signage is 

mounted on the door leaf without braille or raised characters, which is in violation of 

Section 4.1.3(16) and 4.30 of the ADAAG and Sections 216.2 and 703 of the 2010 

ADA Standards for Accessible Design.

vi. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), as to the men’s restroom, 

Plaintiff could not transfer to the toilet without assistance, as the required 

maneuvering clearance was not provided due to the encroaching item (trash can), 

which encroaches over the accessible water closet clear floor space. This is a 

violation of Section 4.16.2 of the ADAAG (which specifies the amount of space 

required at an accessible toilet, which includes clear floor space around fixtures) and 

Section 604.3.1 of the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design which states that 

water closet clearance shall be 60 inches (1525 mm) minimum measured 

perpendicular from the side wall and 56 inches (1420 mm) minimum measured 

perpendicular from the rear wall). 

vii. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), as to the men’s restroom,

Plaintiff could not transfer to the toilet without assistance, as the required 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 8 of 11
9

maneuvering clearance was not provided due to the fact that the lavatory/sink 

encroaches over the accessible water closet clear floor space. The lavatory is 

mounted at 49” from the water closet side wall which does not provide the required 

clear floor space. This is a violation of Section 604.3 of the 2010 Standards for 

Accessible Design. Section 604.3.1 states that clearance around a water closet shall 

be 60’(1525 mm) minimum measured perpendicular from the side wall and 56” 

(1420 mm) minimum measured perpendicular from the rear wall. Section 604.3.2 

does not give an exception of overlap of the clear floor space with a lavatory/sink, 

only associated grab bars, dispensers, sanitary napkin disposal units, coat hooks, 

shelves are permitted to overlap.

viii. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), as to the men’s restroom, 

Plaintiff could not exit the restroom area without assistance, as the required 

maneuvering clearance on the push side of the door is not provided. The fact that the 

exit door does not provide the required maneuvering clearance is a violation Section 

4.13.6 of the ADAAG and Section 404.2.4 of the 2010 ADA Standards for 

Accessible Design (maneuvering clearances shall extend the full width of the 

doorway and the required latch side or hinge side clearance).

ix. As to Defendant La Cucina (operator of the restaurant) and Defendant Coral Way

(owner of the commercial property) (jointly and severally), as to the men’s restroom, 

Plaintiff was exposed to a cutting/burning hazard because the lavatory sink does not 

have fully wrapped bottom sink pipes due to improper maintenance, therefore there 

is no proper insulation protecting users of that sink against the plumbing pipes under 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 9 of 11
10

the sink. This is a violation of Section 4.19.4 of the ADAAG which states that hot 

water and drain pipes under lavatories shall be insulated or otherwise configured to 

protect against contact. This is also a violation of Section 606.5 of the 2010 ADA 

Standards for Accessible Design, because the lavatory pipes are not fully wrapped or 

maintained.

28. Pursuant to the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq. and 28 C.F.R. §36.304, 

Defendants have been required to make the commercial property and the Perricone’s 

restaurant operated therein accessible to persons with disabilities since January 28, 1992. 

Defendants have jointly and severally failed to comply with this mandate.

29. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12188, this Court is vested with the authority to grant 

Plaintiff injunctive relief; including an order to alter the commercial property and the 

restaurant located therein such that it is made readily accessible to, and useable by,

individuals with disabilities to the extent required by the ADA.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jesus Gonzalez hereby demands judgment against 

Defendant Coral Way Partners LLC (owner of the commercial property) and Defendant La 

Cucina Management, Inc. (operator of Perricone’s Marketplace & Cafe located therein) and 

requests the following injunctive and declaratory relief: 

a) The Court declare that Defendants have violated the ADA;

b) The Court enter an Order directing Defendants to evaluate and neutralize 

their policies, practices and procedures toward persons with disabilities, 

c) The Court enter an Order requiring Defendants to alter the commercial 

property and the restaurant (Perricone’s Marketplace & Café) located therein such 

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 10 of 11
11

that it becomes accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities to the full 

extent required by the Title III of the ADA;

d) The Court award reasonable costs and attorneys fees; and 

e) The Court award any and all other relief that may be necessary and

appropriate. 

Dated September 19, 2022

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ J. Courtney Cunningham

J. Courtney Cunningham, Esq.

J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC

FBN: 628166

8950 SW 74th Court, Suite 2201

Miami, Florida 33156

Telephone: 305-351-2014

Email: cc@cunninghampllc.com

Counsel for Plaintiff

Case 1:22-cv-22986-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/19/2022 Page 11 of 11