UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

MICHAEL MILES, Individually,

Plaintiff,

v.

GARLAND LODGE & RESORT LLC, a 

Illinois Limited Liability Company,

Defendant.

______________________________________/

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case No. 2:15-cv-11256

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND EQUITABLE RELIEF

(w/Jury Demand Endorsed Hereon)

Plaintiff, MICHAEL MILES, Individually, (sometimes referred to as “Plaintiff”), hereby sue the 

Defendant, GARLAND LODGE & RESORT, LLC, an Illinois 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, MICHAEL MILES, is an individual residing in FINDLAY, OH, in the County 

of HANCOCK.

2. Defendant’s property, GARLAND LODGE & RESORT is located at 4700 N. Red Oak 

Rd, Lewiston, MI 49756 in MONTMORENCY 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.

4. Venue is properly located in the Eastern District of Michigan because venue lies in the 

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.1 Page 1 of 11
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, MICHAEL MILES is an Ohio resident, is sui juris, and qualifies as an 

individual with disabilities as defined by the ADA. Michael Miles is paraplegic and uses 

a wheelchair for mobility. MICHAEL MILES visits Lewiston and the surrounding area, 

including Montmorency County, Michigan, for golf trips and family vacations several 

times annually and has visited the property which forms the basis of this lawsuit and 

plans to return to the property to avail himself of the goods and services offered to the 

public at the property. Michael Miles is an avid golfer and has firm plans to return to the 

GARLAND LODGE AND RESORT to golf and stay as a hotel guest. The Plaintiff has 

encountered architectural barriers at the subject property. The barriers to access at the 

property have endangered his safety. 

7. 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 

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.2 Page 2 of 11
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 as a golfer and hotel customer, 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 as a hotel customer, a golfer 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.

8. 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 GARLAND LODGE & RESORT is located at 4700 N. Red Oak Road, 

Lewiston, MI in MONTMORENCY County.

9. MICHAEL MILES 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 11 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. MICHAEL 

MILES desires to visit GARLAND LODGE & RESORT 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 

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.3 Page 3 of 11
enjoyment of the property without fear of discrimination.

10. 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.

11. 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 GARLAND LODGE & RESORT has 

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

Parking

A. Designated accessible parking spaces have no access aisles in violation of the 

ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

B. No designated accessible van parking spaces in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

C. Some designated accessible parking are located on an excessive slope or cross 

slope in violation of the ADA whose remedy Is readily achievable.

D. Some designated accessible parking have no striping in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

Accessible routes

E. There is a ramp with no handrails within the interior route to guestrooms in 

violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

F. There is a ramp with no handrails to outdoor dining at hotel restaurant in violation 

of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

G. Threshold in excess of 1 inch at pro shop entryway in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

H. There is no stable and slip resistant route to water fountain at Jacuzzi out building 

in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

Access to Goods and Services

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.4 Page 4 of 11
I. The indoor swimming pool at the Facility does not provide any accessible means 

of entry, including no adaptive lift, in violation of the provisions of section 242.2 

of the 2010 Standards for Accessible Design whose remedy is readily achievable.

J. The outdoor swimming pool at the Facility does not provide any accessible means 

of entry, including no adaptive lift, in violation of the provisions of section 242.2 

of the 2010 Standards for Accessible whose remedy is readily achievable.

K. The large standalone Jacuzzi hot tub at the Facility does not provide any 

accessible means of entry in violation of the provisions of section 242.2 of the 

2010 Standards for Accessible Design whose remedy is readily achievable.

L. There are tables provide at outdoor pool with no accessible seating and counter 

space in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

Outdoor pool restrooms

M. Toilet stall has insufficient clear floor space in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

N. There are no rear or side grab bars at toilet unit in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

O. Lavatory has exposed pipes with no insulation to protect for scalding in violation 

of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

P. Shower has threshold in excess of a 5 inches in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

Q. Shower has no spray unit on a 59 inch hose with the requisite on/off control with 

a non-positive shut-off in violation of section 607.6 of the 2010 Standards for 

Accessible Design.

R. Shower soap dispenser mounted in excess of allowable reach range in violation of 

the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

S. Shower faucet controls require tight clasping or twisting in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

Hotel Lobby Restroom

T. Coat hooks mounted in excess of allowable reach range in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

U. Flush control not located on open side of toilet unit in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

Guestroom 

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.5 Page 5 of 11
V. The door to exterior patio has door hardware that requires tight clasping or 

twisting in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

W. The thermostat is mounted in excess of allowable height range in violation of the 

ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

X. There is a utility counter/desk with insufficient knee clearance in violation of the 

ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

Z. Towel rack in guest bathroom mounted in excess of allowable range in violation 

of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

AA. Closet storage, coat hooks, irons and other amenities mounted in excess of 

allowable range in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

BB. Toilet paper dispenser in guest bathroom is not mounted in compliance with the 

ADAAAG.

CC. Toilet unit is too far from wall to centerline of unit in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

DD. Toilet unit height is below accessible guidelines form the finished floor to the seat 

in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

FF. Bathtub grab bars are not of proper dimensions and are not mounted in locations 

required per the ADAAG.

GG. Bathtub has faucets located and mounted directly on the open side of the tub 

which impair the ability to transfer and these should not be on a tub in a 

designated accessible guestroom.

HH. Shower faucet controls are not located in accordance with code whose remedy is 

readily achievable.

II. Shower has no spray unit on a 59 inch hose with the requisite on/off control with 

a non-positive shut-off in violation of section 607.6 of the 2010 Standards for 

Accessible Design.

JJ. Lavatory has exposed pipes with no insulation to protect for scalding in violation 

of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

KK. Lavatory does not have sufficient knee clearance in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

LL. There are no designated accessible guestrooms fitted with a roll-in shower in 

violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

MM. There are an insufficient total number of designated accessible guestrooms in 

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.6 Page 6 of 11
violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

The Golf Courses

Fountains, Swampfire and Monarch Golf Courses

NN, Upon information and belief, there are barriers to handicap access at golf course 

restroom facilities and shelters, as well as other on-course facilities, that are not in 

compliance with ADA implementing regulations but are required and are readily 

achievable. Plaintiff requires further inspection of the facilities.

Reflections Golf Course

Restroom 

OO. There are no rear or side grab bars at toilet unit in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

PP. Toilet unit height is below accessible guidelines form the finished floor to the seat 

in violation of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

QQ. Door hardware requires tight clasping and twisting in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

RR. Dispensers are mounted in excess of allowable height in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

SS. Lavatory has exposed pipes with no insulation to protect for scalding in violation 

of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

Storm Shelter House 

TT. Storm shelter has insufficient clear floor area under the shelter per the 2010 

ADAAG.

Shelter and Restroom 

UU. There is a threshold at entryway in excess of 1/4 inch in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

VV. There are no rear or side grab bars at toilet unit in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

WW. Door hardware requires tight clasping and twisting in violation of the ADA whose 

remedy is readily achievable.

YY. Dispensers are mounted in excess of allowable height in violation of the ADA 

whose remedy is readily achievable.

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.7 Page 7 of 11
ZZ. Lavatory has exposed pipes with no insulation to protect for scalding in violation 

of the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

AAA. Storm shelter has insufficient clear floor area under the shelter per the 2010 

ADAAG.

Adaptive Golf cart

BBB. There is no adaptive golf cart available for disabled golfers at any of the resort’s 

four courses whereas, golf carts are offered to able bodied golfers, in violation of 

the ADA whose remedy is readily achievable.

Policies and procedures

CCC. The resort operator lacks or has inadequate defined policies and procedures for 

the assistance of disabled patrons.

12. The discriminatory violations described in paragraph 11 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 has 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 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

13. Plaintiff restates the allegations of ¶¶1-12 as if fully rewritten here.

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.8 Page 8 of 11
14. GARLAND LODGE & RESORT, 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").

15. 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.

16. 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.

17. 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.

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.9 Page 9 of 11
18. Plaintiff restates the allegations of ¶¶1-17 as if fully rewritten here.

19. GARLAND LODGE & RESORT, and the businesses therein, are "place[s] of public 

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

20. 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, 

whereas, the Plaintiff was unable any bathroom facilities during play at the Reflections golf 

course. Furthermore, Plaintiff Miles incurred great personal expense to trailer his 

personal adaptive golf cart to GARLAND LODGE & RESORT due to the 4 course 

resort’s failure to supply any adaptive carts for the use of disabled patrons. Additionally, 

Plaintiff Miles experienced significant barriers to parking and accessible routes 

throughout all parts of the resort. And the barriers to access at his designated accessible 

guestroom’s bathtub was were especially non-compliant and exceedingly difficult to use.

21. Pursuant to M.C.L §37.1606, Plaintiff is entitled to compensatory and punitive 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 punitive 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 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.10 Page 10 of 11
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: April 2, 2015

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 – Phone

(419) 241-9737 - Facsimile

dunnlawoffice@sbcglobal.net

Case 1:15-cv-11256-TLL-PTM ECF No. 1 filed 04/02/15 PageID.11 Page 11 of 11