Moss v. Otay Water District
Mar 16, 2016OUTCOME: $250,000
Client discriminated against on the job due to race.
Mark Dee Potter's Legal Cases (8)
San Diego, CA
Employment and labor Lawyer at San Diego, CA
Practice Areas: Employment & Labor, Civil Rights ... +3 more
Employment Discrimination
Feb 20, 2015OUTCOME: $550,000
Client was discriminated against at work on the basis of his disability.
Lewis v. Smith
Feb 25, 2014OUTCOME: $80,557,170 Judgment
My client was severely brain damaged when he was 18 months old in a pond at a business. There was no fence around the pond.
Premises Liability
Apr 25, 2012OUTCOME: $415,000
Client shot in parking lot.
Premises Liability
Mar 23, 2010OUTCOME: $500,000
Client shot at apartment complex.
Miller v. California Speedway
Mar 17, 2010OUTCOME: Prevailed in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Established new law requiring clear line of site over standing spectators for accessible seating
Client, who was reliant on a wheelchair for mobility was unable to see over standing spectators. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Munson v. Del Taco
Aug 19, 2009OUTCOME: CA Supreme Court ruled in our favor
A Del Taco location was inaccessible to Mr. Munson who is reliant on a wheelchair for mobility. Del Taco argued that pursuant to existing president, Gunther v. Lin, that Mr. Munson would not be entitl ... ed to damages unless he could show Del Taco intentionally discriminated against him. California Supreme Court unanimously ruled on our favor overturning Gunther and holding no intent is required for damages under the Unruh Civil Rights Act in cases derivative of the ADA. This case greatly strengthened the rights of persons with disabilities.
Fortyune v. AMC Theater
Nov 04, 2004OUTCOME: 9th Circuit Court of Appeal ruled in our favor
Client who used a wheelchair for mobility arrived at the theater well before the show with his non-disabled wife and found all the companion seats taken. A man in a companion seat (next to the wheelch ... air space) refused to move even after the usher asked him. AMC's policy was to only ask a person to move, they would not force the issue beyond asking. The US District Court and 9th Circuit Court of Appeals both ruled that AMC has to do whatever it takes to get the companion seat available to the class of persons it was designed for, persons with disabilities or their companions. The powerful precedent from this case goes far beyond movie theaters to all types of accessible features. For instance, this case strongly supports the argument that hotels would be required to not rent their accessible rooms to non-disabled guests.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
