11th Circuit Fields Case of Disability Rights Claimant Sanctioned in Serial Litigation

While his attorney called him a crusader for the disabled, a federal judge found that he was engaged in a campaign to file frivolous civil-rights lawsuits for profit.

(CN) — The 11th Circuit considered Thursday whether a civil court judge overstepped his authority by issuing fines and community service penalties against a man known for filing more than 130 lawsuits over disability access.

Alexander Johnson was once hailed by his now-suspended attorney as a crusader for deaf people’s rights. He and the lawyer, Scott Dinin, filed dozens of federal lawsuits over alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, a law requiring the government and certain businesses to make their services accessible to disabled people.

The lawsuits largely focused on website accessibility and a lack of closed captioning for the deaf. Dinin filed several hundred more ADA cases with other plaintiffs.

The seemingly altruistic litigation crusade came to a halt in 2019, when Judge Paul Huck in the Southern District of Florida hit Johnson and Dinin with sanctions. He handed down the penalties after finding that Dinin had “egregiously inflated and misrepresented his billable time” in two cases over a lack of closed captioning on videos that pop up at gas station pumps.

Huck investigated more than two dozen comparable cases that Johnson and Dinin had filed against gas stations in Florida, alleging violations of the ADA as well as Florida civil rights law. The judge concluded that the duo had a  “selfish motive in bringing these cases which benefit no one except Johnson and Dinin.”

He slapped Dinin with more than $50,000 in sanctions. Johnson was ordered to pay $6,000 and was subjected to a penalty not usually seen in civil court — community service, 150 hours of it. Johnson was also restricted from filing new ADA cases in federal court.

During oral arguments Thursday in the 11th Circuit, Johnson’s attorneys told a three-judge appeals panel that Johnson is being unfairly penalized for the actions of his attorney.

“There was absolutely no evidence that… Johnson knew that his lawyer was doing sanctionable conduct,” said Thomas Sclafani, Johnson’s counsel.

Sclafani insisted that Dinin was the one responsible for inserting the ill-fated civil-rights claims into the litigation at issue. Huck had found that those claims were frivolous because the duo repeatedly failed to ensure that administrative remedies were exhausted before suing.

The attorney argued the district judge improperly assumed the role of a federal prosecutor and re-litigator when he examined the slew of gas-station ADA cases, some of which had already settled. Hitting Johnson with community service — and seeking to ban him from filing ADA claims nationwide — was an improper use of the court’s authority, Sclafani claimed.

“The district court took on the roles of prosecutor, counsel for the court, witness and judge of the law, all in violation of Mr. Johnson’s constitutional right to due process,” Johnson’s brief to the 11th Circuit said.

The brief also takes issue with a purported lack of notice before an initial sanctions hearing in the district court.

Dinin, who was suspended last year for misconduct in the ADA cases, is not challenging the sanctions. He is, however, asking for a determination on the crux of the gas-station cases: whether the absence of closed captioning on gas pump screens is indeed an ADA violation.

Both Dinin and Johnson argued to the three-judge appellate panel that Judge Huck erred when he characterized the lack of closed captioning at gas pumps as a minor inconvenience to the deaf.

U.S. Circuit Judges Beverly Martin and Robin Rosenbaum, Barack Obama appointees, are fielding the appeal alongside U.S. Circuit Judge Robert Luck, a Donald Trump appointee. They are handling the case in the 11th Circuit’s Miami division.

Court-appointed amicus curiae attorney Jennifer Ruiz argued to keep the sanctions against Johnson in place. She said “the record reflects Johnson was not a hands-off client, led blindly by his counsel.” Rather, he was skilled in ADA law and “directed litigation strategy” at times, Ruiz claims.

“The court upheld its constitutional obligation to prevent Johnson from continuing to waste judicial resources in a case the court already determined lacked subject-matter jurisdiction,” Ruiz wrote in a brief.

“The court was within its discretion to tailor sanctions to its bad faith findings,” the brief continues.

According to Ruiz, the central reason the district court dismissed the ADA claims — Johnson’s lack of standing — remains valid.  She told the panel Thursday that Johnson was not a plaintiff seeking redress but a profiteer. He once visited multiple gas stations in a single day in search of ADA violations from which to profit, Ruiz claimed.

Johnson purportedly had an arrangement with Dinin whereby they would split proceeds from their ADA litigation. According to Huck, Johnson earned $84,000 over a three-year period for his participation in the ADA lawsuits.

Ruiz said the community service was a reasonable punishment in light of Johnson’s inability to pay a large financial penalty.

Dinin remains ineligible to practice law in Florida on account of an 18-month suspension entered against him in July 2020.

The attorney made waves in the legal community when he won a pioneering decision on website accessibility against Winn-Dixie under the Americans with Disabilities Act. In April 2021, the 11th Circuit axed the decision however, ruling that websites are not “public accommodations” subject to ADA accessibility requirements.