The Barker family has been a pillar in the Nicolaus community for 72 years, ever since J.C. Barker, affectionately known as Ted, took over ownership of the East Nicolaus Market. Built in 1926, the market has served as a favorite spot by locals and visitors alike in the area and serves as the only grocery store in Nicolaus. James Barker, son of Ted Barker, assumed ownership of the store in the late 70’s, following his father’s retirement.
Debbie Vincent Coupe, a resident of the Nicolaus community and active member on the East Nicolaus High School Board, said that she has used the East Nicolaus Market since she was very young.
“I went to school with both of James Barker’s daughters,” Coupe said, “my own dad died when I was very young and he has always been a sort of father figure to me. He is a really good guy.” According to Coupe, her own children often frequented the market.
“That was my son’s first stop after school everyday,” she said with a laugh. “The high schoolers often stop in for chips or a soda.”
On January 24 of this year, James Barker was faced with a lawsuit by a quadriplegic lawyer, one Scott Johnson of Carmichael, California, for failing to meet ADA standards. Barker is not the first to face a lawsuit by Johnson. A News10 analysis of federal court records in the Eastern District of California indicated Johnson has been the plaintiff in at least 1,079 ADA lawsuits since 2003. Johnson said he hadn’t kept count, but did not dispute the number. He said his average settlement with business owners has been between $4,000 and $6,000.
“I’m an attorney and I enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act,” Johnson explained, “it’s been a law on the books now for 20 years.”
“This is his way of making a living,” Barker said, “he targets small businesses and does so to line his own pockets. He does not do it to help set higher standards for the handicapped community.”
California is notorious for these sorts of litigations against small businesses. In 2011, California senator, Dianne Feinstein asked state Senate President Pro Tem, Darrell Steinberg, that the state legislature do something to stop allegedly abusive lawsuits by this same group of plaintiff lawyers. A bill was drafted that would give business owners 120 days to fix violations from the time a demand letter was received. This was voted down. In 2012 the California Chamber of Commerce supported a piece of legislation known as SB 1186 to limit frivolous litigation connected with ADA. This was signed into law. The goal now of the CalChamber is to “support comprehensive reforms to state disability laws that encourage and facilitate greater compliance by businesses with disability access laws; encourage resolution of access violations without use of litigation; and seek to reduce abusive and unwarranted demands for money and lawsuits under disability laws that seek to extract monetary settlements rather than improve access.”
In many states, plaintiffs do not receive any monetary gain through these litigations, aside from injunctive relief. However, with the introduction of laws such as California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act and the California Disabled Persons Act, plaintiffs are allowed to add on state claims for money damages onto their requests for injunctive relief. The act also allows plaintiffs to claim “treble damages” with a minimum of $4,000 per access violation, plus attorney fees. One estimate claims that 42 percent of the nation’s ADA-related lawsuits are brought in California.
So where does this leave hardworking, small business owners like James Barker?
“I absolutely cannot take this case to court,” Barker said, “if he continues to press charges, then I have to close the store. I have no other options.”
Expanses racked up in court cases, even short ones, can amount to thousands of dollars, funds that Barker does not have.
Under Title III of the ADA, it states that barrier removal needs to be accomplished only when it is “readily achievable” to do so. “Readily achievable” is defined by the ADA as easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much difficulty or expense. When asked if he thought whether or not the architectural changes that needed to be made in order to meet ADA standards were “readily achievable,” Barker gave a firm no.
“This building was built in 1926. My clearance for aisle width is a bit iffy because I have some support posts in the center of the floor. They hold the roof up. The only way to meet ADA requirements would be by removing those posts and then that building would be four feet tall because it would collapse in on itself. Another option would be to take out all my shelving, but then I would have nowhere to keep my merchandise.”
The ADA was passed into law in 1992 and the original standard was that structures built prior to 1992 could remain immune to the architectural changes, unless, again, changes were seen as “readily achievable.” Barker said he was given no warning in advance about the aforementioned violations.
“A lot of our local handicap community cannot get around easily and they depend on there being a store here,” he said, “he [Johnson] is going to make it very difficult on them.”
The decision to shut down this historic market does not sit well with members of the community.
“I don’t know what we’re going to do without the market,” said Joyce Gorell, long time resident of East Nicolaus, “My husband and I are retired and can hardly get anywhere.” Locals like Gorell have been using the market since the early 60’s and are strong supporters of Barker.
“James is an amazing guy,” Gorell said, “on a business and a personal level. When I was 18, I accidentally set one of our fields on fire. At the time, James was on the fire department, and when I was absolutely falling apart, he gave me a big, old hug. A truly caring guy.”
John Scheiber, another Nicolaus resident, said his family moved to Nicolaus in the mid 1800s.
“My family has been here at least five generations,” Scheiber said, “James has done a lot for the community, whether it be working for the fire department or serving on local school boards. He has always held this community together.”
Barker is scheduled to appear in court within the next few weeks.
“I need good advice,” he said, “I have never been sued before, I’m not sure what to do from here.”