UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

LELAND FOSTER, Individually,

Plaintiff,

v.

MISTRINI, LLC, a Michigan Limited 

Liability Company,

Defendant.

______________________________________/

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No. 1:14-cv-14660

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND EQUITABLE RELIEF

(w/Jury Demand Endorsed Hereon)

Plaintiff, LELAND FOSTER, Individually, (sometimes referred to as “Plaintiff”), hereby sues

the Defendant, MISTRINI, LLC, a Michigan Limited Liability Company, (sometimes referred to 

as “Defendant”), for Injunctive Relief, and attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs 

pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. (“ADA”).

PARTIES

1. Plaintiff, LELAND FOSTER, is an individual residing in Swanton, OH, in the County of 

Fulton.

2. Defendant’s property, SUPER 8 MOTEL OF SAGINAW is located at 4848 Towne 

Center Road, Saginaw, MI 48604 in SAGINAW County.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. Count I is brought pursuant to the laws of the United States, therefore the Court has

jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331. Count II utilizes the same core of operative 

fact, and is therefore subject to supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367.

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.1 Page 1 of 8
4. Venue is properly located in the Eastern District of Michigan because venue lies in the 

judicial district of the property situs. The Defendant’s property is located in and does 

business within this judicial district.

5. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 28 U.S.C. § 1343, this Court has been given original 

jurisdiction over actions which arise from the Defendant’s violations of Title III of the 

Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. See also 28 U.S.C. § 2201 

and § 2202.

6. Plaintiff, LELAND FOSTER is an Ohio resident, is sui juris, and qualifies as an 

individual with disabilities as defined by the ADA. Leland Foster is an individual 

diagnosed with cerebral palsy and permanently uses a wheelchair for mobility. 

Additionally Leland Foster has difficulty grasping with his hands also as a result of his 

disability. Leland Foster frequents many establishments in the city of Saginaw and has 

visited and been a customer at the hotel which forms the basis of this lawsuit on May 30, 

2013 in which he registered for a 3 night stay but terminated his accommodations early 

due to excessive barriers to access on the property, and also returned as a customer on 

March 31, 2014 after being advised over the telephone that the hotel renovated, and plans 

to return to the property to avail himself of the goods and services offered to the public at 

the property. The Plaintiff has encountered architectural barriers at the subject property. 

The barriers to access at the property have endangered his safety. 

7. LELAND FOSTER is an avid adaptive sports enthusiast and participates regularly with 

the active Saginaw, Midland and Bay City adaptive sports community, including in local 

marathons, half marathons, hand cycle events and adaptive water skiing at the areas many 

lakes with the various local organizations and other enthusiasts in the community. 

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.2 Page 2 of 8
8. Completely independent of the personal desire to have access to this place of public 

accommodation free of illegal barriers to access, Plaintiff also acts as a "tester" for the 

purpose of discovering, encountering, and engaging discrimination against the disabled in 

public accommodations. When acting as a "tester," Plaintiff employs a routine practice. 

Plaintiff personally visits the public accommodation; engages all of the barriers to access, 

or at least all of those that Plaintiff is able to access; and tests all of those barriers to 

access to determine whether and the extent to which they are illegal barriers to access; 

proceeds with legal action to enjoin such discrimination; and subsequently returns to the 

premises to verify its compliance or non-compliance with the ADA and to otherwise use 

the public accommodation as members of the able-bodied community are able to do. 

Independent of other subsequent visits, Plaintiff also intends to visit the premises 

annually to verify its compliance or non-compliance with the ADA, and its maintenance 

of the accessible features of the premises. In this instance, Plaintiff, in Plaintiff’s 

individual capacity and as a “tester,” visited the Facility, encountered barriers to access at 

the Facility, and engaged and tested those barriers, suffered legal harm and legal injury, 

and will continue to suffer such harm and injury as a result of the illegal barriers to access 

and the ADA violations set forth herein.

9. Defendant owns, leases, leases to, or operates a place of public accommodation as 

defined by the ADA and the regulations implementing the ADA, 28 CFR 36.201(a) and 

36.104. Defendant is responsible for complying with the obligations of the ADA. The 

place of public accommodation that the Defendant owns, operates, leases or leases to is 

known as SUPER 8 MOTEL OF SAGINAW is located at 4848 Towne Center Road, 

Saginaw, MI 48604.

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.3 Page 3 of 8
10. LELAND FOSTER has a realistic, credible, existing and continuing threat of 

discrimination from the Defendant’s non-compliance with the ADA with respect to this 

property as described but not necessarily limited to the allegations in paragraph 12 of this 

complaint. Plaintiff has reasonable grounds to believe that he will continue to be 

subjected to discrimination in violation of the ADA by the Defendant. LELAND 

FOSTER desires to visit SUPER 8 MOTEL OF SAGINAW not only to avail himself of 

the goods and services available at the property but to assure himself that this property is 

in compliance with the ADA so that he and others similarly situated will have full and 

equal enjoyment of the property without fear of discrimination.

11. The Defendant has discriminated against the individual Plaintiff by denying him access 

to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages 

and/or accommodations of the buildings, as prohibited by 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq.

12. The Defendant has discriminated, and is continuing to discriminate, against the Plaintiff 

in violation of the ADA by failing to, inter alia, have accessible facilities by January 26, 

1992 (or January 26, 1993, if Defendant has 10 or fewer employees and gross receipts of 

$500,000 or less). A preliminary inspection of Super 8 Motel of Saginaw has shown that 

violations exist. These violations include, but are not limited to:

Parking & Accessible Routes

A. No access Aisles to designated accessible parking in violation of the ADA

whose remedy is readily achievable.

B. Door handles on accessible route to designated accessible room require tight

clasping and twisting in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily

achievable.

C. Doors on accessible route exceed weight for interior doors in violation of

the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.4 Page 4 of 8
Guestroom

D. Toilet flush on guestroom bathroom not located on open side in violation of

the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

E. There are no hand held shower controls in violation of the ADA whose remedy

is readily achievable.

F. There is no shower cord in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily

achievable.

G. There are no grab bars in designated accessible tub unit in violation of the

ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

H. Amenities are mounted in excess of allowable height in violation of the ADA

whose remedy is readily achievable.

I. Sink apron does not allow for sufficient knee clearance in violation of the

ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

J. Pipes are exposed and risk scalding and burning in violation of the ADA

whose remedy is readily achievable.

Access to Goods and Services

K. Registration counter exceed 37 inches in violation of the ADA whose remedy

is readily achievable.

Policies and Procedure

L. The operator lacks or has inadequate defined policies and procedures for the 

assistance of disabled patrons.

13. The discriminatory violations described in paragraph 12 are not an exclusive list of the 

Defendant’s ADA violations. Plaintiff requires the inspection of the Defendant’s place of public 

accommodation in order to photograph and measure all of the discriminatory acts violating the 

ADA and all of the barriers to access. The Plaintiff, has been denied access to, and has been 

denied the benefits of services, programs and activities of the Defendant’s buildings and its 

facilities, and have otherwise been discriminated against and damaged by the Defendant because 

of the Defendant’s ADA violations, as set forth above. The individual Plaintiff, and all others 

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.5 Page 5 of 8
similarly situated will continue to suffer such discrimination, injury and damage without the 

immediate relief provided by the ADA as requested herein. In order to remedy this 

discriminatory situation, the Plaintiff requires an inspection of the Defendant’s place of public 

accommodation in order to determine all of the areas of non-compliance with the Americans 

with Disabilities Act.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITES ACT

14. Plaintiff restates the allegations of ¶¶1-13 as if fully rewritten here.

15. SUPER 8 MOTEL OF SAGINAW, and the businesses therein, are public 

accommodations and service establishments, and as such must be, but are not, in compliance 

with the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and Americans with Disabilities Act 

Accessibility Guidelines ("ADAAG").

16. Plaintiff was unlawfully denied full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities,

privileges, and advantages of the property and the businesses therein on the basis of his

disability, due to Defendant’s property failing to be in compliance with Title III of the Americans 

with Disabilities Act and its accompanying regulations, as prohibited by 42 U.S.C. § 12182, et 

seq., and will continue to discriminate against Plaintiff and others with disabilities unless and 

until Defendant is compelled to remove all physical barriers that exist at the facility, including 

those specifically set forth herein, and make the facility accessible to and usable by persons with 

disabilities, including Plaintiff.

17. The Plaintiff, and others similarly-situated, are without adequate remedy at law and are 

suffering irreparable harm, and reasonably anticipate that they will continue to suffer irreparable 

harm unless and until Defendant is required to remove the physical barriers, dangerous 

conditions and ADA violations that exist at the Facility, including those set forth herein.

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.6 Page 6 of 8
18. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §12187, Plaintiff requests that the Court issue an injunction 

requiring Defendant to make such readily achievable alterations as are legally required to 

provide full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, and advantages on 

its property to disabled persons. In connection with that relief, Plaintiff requests reasonable 

attorney’s fees and costs of maintaining this action.

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF MICHIGAN PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES CIVIL RIGHTS ACT

M.C.L. § 37.1301 et seq.

19. Plaintiff restates the allegations of ¶¶1-18 as if fully rewritten here.

20. SUPER 8 MOTEL OF SAGINAW, and the businesses therein, are "place[s] of public 

accommodation" pursuant to M.C.L §37.1301(a).

21. Defendant committed an unlawful act pursuant to M.C.L §37.1302(a) by denying Plaintiff 

full enjoyment of its goods, services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges.

22. Pursuant to M.C.L §37.1606, Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory and exemplary damages, 

and attorneys fees and costs, in an amount to be determined at trial, but in any event not less 

than $25,000.00, as well as issuance of an injunction requiring Defendant to allow full and 

equal enjoyment of its goods, services, facilities, privileges, and advantages to disabled persons.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands,

for Count I, an injunction requiring Defendant to make all readily achievable alterations 

to allow full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, and advantages

to disabled persons, and the reasonable attorneys fees and costs of maintaining this action; and, 

for Count II, compensatory and exemplary damages, and attorneys fees and costs, in an

amount to be determined at trial, but in any event not less than $25,000.00, as well as

issuance of an injunction requiring Defendant to allow full and equal enjoyment of the

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.7 Page 7 of 8
goods, services, facilities, privileges, and advantages to disabled persons.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a jury trial on liability and damages for Count II.

Respectfully Submitted,

Counsel for Plaintiff:

\s\ Owen B Dunn Jr -- dated: December 9, 2014

Owen B. Dunn, Jr., Esq. MI Bar Number P66315

Law Office of Owen B. Dunn, Jr.

4334 W. Central Ave., Suite 222

Toledo, OH 43615

(419) 241-9661

(419) 241-9661 – Phone

(419) 241-9737 - Facsimile

dunnlawoffice@sbcglobal.net

Case 1:14-cv-14660-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 12/09/14 PageID.8 Page 8 of 8