1. Because of any person’s actual or perceived …  disability …, directly or indirectly:  (a) to refuse, withhold from or deny to such  person the full and equal enjoyment, on equal  terms and conditions, of any of the  accommodations,  advantages,  services,  facilities or privileges of the place or provider  of public accommodation;  NYC Admin. Code §8-107(4)  139.  The Defendants have not reasonably accommodated the Plaintiff, and other  disabled individuals, in violation of New York City’s Administrative Code §8-102(4), (16),  (17), (18), §8-107(4) and §8-107(15).  140.  In violation of the New York City Administrative Code, the Defendants have  unlawfully discriminated against the Plaintiff and all others similarly situated.  27  141.  Reasonable accommodations and modifications are necessary to enable the  Plaintiff, and all others similarly situated, the ability to enjoy non-restricted access and use  of the Defendants’ Subject Facility.  142.  In violation of the New York City Administrative Code the owners, operators,  lessees, proprietors, managers, agents and/or employees of the Defendants’ Subject  Facility have, because of the actual, or perceived, disability of the Plaintiff directly, or  indirectly, refused, withheld from, and denied him the accommodations, advantages,  facilities, or privileges thereof.  143.  In violation of the New York City Administrative Code, on the basis of the  Plaintiff’s disability, the Defendants have demonstrated that the patronage, or custom, of  the Plaintiff, and all others similarly situated, is unwelcome, objectionable and not  acceptable.  144.  The Defendants are in violation of the New York City Human Rights Law by  denying the Plaintiff full and safe access to all of the benefits, accommodations and  services of the Subject Facility.  145.  Pursuant to New York City Human Rights Law §8-502(c), notice of this action is  being served upon the New York City Commission on Human Rights in accordance with  the statute.  146.  As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ disability discrimination, in  violation of the New York City Human Rights Laws, the Plaintiff has suffered, and  continues to suffer, personal injuries, including mental anguish and emotional distress,  including, but not limited to, depression, humiliation, stress, embarrassment, anxiety, loss  of self-esteem and self-confidence, emotional pain and suffering.  28  147.  The Plaintiff requests compensatory damages in the amount of $1,000 from each  Defendant under the New York City Human Rights Law, NYC Admin. Code §8-125.  60. The Plaintiff, who was born in 1949, is an elderly man aged beyond his 71 years. He suffers  from debilitating diseases and was diagnosed with a neurological condition, which affects  his walking. The Plaintiff’s treating neurologist determined that he has gait dysfunction,  the causes of which include peripheral neuropathy due to diabetes mellitus, chronic right  basilar ganglia lacunar infarct and cerebellar ataxia. The Plaintiff’s treating neurologist also  determined that he has essential tremor. Furthermore, the Plaintiff has decreased vision due  15  to glaucoma and is blind in the right eye. The Plaintiff’s gait is unsteady and he falls when  he walks short distances. His treating neurologist prescribed him a wheelchair and a  handicapped parking placard. The Plaintiff obtained the wheelchair and uses it regularly.  The New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission issued him a disabled person parking placard  together with a handicapped identification card. The handicapped placard can be used in  any car, in which the Plaintiff is travelling. The Plaintiff relies on his wheelchair and parks  appropriately in handicapped accessible parking spaces. He also needs appropriate and  statutorily mandated space next to that car, so that he may transfer from the car to the  wheelchair. The Plaintiff is disabled under the statute, which in pertinent part states that  Disability means, with respect to an individual, a physical or  mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of  the major life activities of such individual… . The phrase  major life activities means functions such as caring for one’s  self, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing,  speaking, breathing, learning and working.  Violations of the ADA   Violations of the New York State Human Rights Laws  117.  The Plaintiff re-alleges, and incorporates, by this reference, all the allegations set  forth in this complaint, as if fully set forth herein.  118.  The New York State Human Rights Law, in relevant part, provides the following:  It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for any  person, being the owner, lessee, proprietor, manager,  superintendent, agent or employee of any place of public  accommodation … because of the … disability … of any  person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from or  deny to such person any of the accommodations, advantages,  facilities or privileges thereof … to the effect that any of the  accommodations, advantages, facilities and privileges of any  such place shall be refused, withheld from or denied to any  person on account of … disability … .  NYS Executive Law §296(2)(a)  24  119.  The Defendants’ Subject Facility is a place of public accommodation, as defined in  New York State Human Rights Law §292(9).  120.  The Defendants have further violated the New York State Human Rights Law by  being in violation of the rights provided under the ADA.  121.  The Defendants are in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law by  denying the Plaintiff, and others similarly situated, full and safe access to all of the benefits,  accommodations and services of the Subject Facility.  122.  The Defendants do not provide the Plaintiff, and others similarly situated, with  equal opportunity to use their public accommodation.  123.  The Defendants have failed to make all readily achievable accommodations and  modifications to remove barriers to access in violation of Executive Law §296(2)(c)(iii).  124.  As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ unlawful discrimination, which  is in violation of the Executive Law, the Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer,  personal injuries, which include emotional distress, including, but not limited to,  humiliation, embarrassment, stress and anxiety.  125.  The Defendants have not provided the Plaintiff, and others similarly situated, with  evenhanded treatment in violation of New York State Human Rights Law §296.  126.  The Defendants’ direct, or indirect, unequal treatment of the Plaintiff, and others  similarly situated, was demonstrated when he was discriminated against.  127.  The Defendants have, because of the Plaintiff’s disability, directly, or indirectly,  refused, withheld from, or denied him the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or  privileges of their public accommodation.  25  128.  The Defendants have demonstrated that the patronage, or custom, of the Plaintiff,  and other similarly situated individuals, is unwelcome, unwanted, undesirable,  unacceptable and objectionable.  129.  In violation of the New York State Human Rights Laws the Defendants and their  agents discriminated against the Plaintiff.  130.  As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ unlawful discrimination, which  was, and is, in violation of the New York State Human Rights laws, the Plaintiff has  suffered, and continues to suffer, personal injuries, such as mental anguish and emotional  distress, including, but not limited to, depression, humiliation, stress, embarrassment,  anxiety, loss of self-esteem and self-confidence, together with emotional pain and  suffering.  131.  The Plaintiff requests compensatory damages from each Defendant in the amount  of $1,000 under the New York State Human Rights Law, NY CLS Exec §297(9).  Violations of the New York State Civil Rights Laws  132.  The Plaintiff re-alleges, and incorporates by this reference, all the allegations set  forth in this complaint, as if fully set forth herein.  133.  The Defendants have violated the Plaintiff’s civil rights on the basis of his  disability.  134.  Consequently, the Plaintiff is entitled to recover the penalty prescribed by Civil  Rights Law §40-c and §40-d, in the amount of $500 for each violation from each  Defendant.  26  135.  Pursuant to the New York Civil Rights law, §40-d, the Defendants are guilty of a  class A misdemeanor.  136.  Notice of this action is being served upon the attorney general, as required by New  York Civil Rights Law, §40-d, in accordance with the statute.  Violations of the New York City Human Rights Laws  137.  The Plaintiff re-alleges, and incorporates by this reference, all the allegations set  forth in this complaint, as if fully set forth herein.  138.  The New York City Human Rights Law, in relevant part, provides the below.  It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for any person  who is the owner, franchisor, franchisee, lessor, lessee,  proprietor, manager, superintendent, agent or employee of  any place or provider of public accommodation:  