EN
Translate:
EN
James Rutherford
Disability: "mobility limitations"
Represented by: the Manning Firm, Atty. Joseph Manning
Number of lawsuits filed: thousands
Targets: grocery stores, drug stores, and restaurants .
On April 24, 2019, the Riverside District Attorney filed a scathing complaint alleging that James Rutherford had made false statements in ADA-based lawsuits. The People of the State of California v. James Rutherford et al, Case No: RIC1902577.
- “First, Rutherford alleges in the first paragraph of the federal ADA lawsuits that he is a California resident with a qualified disability [see 42 USCS § 12102(2)], and as a result of said disability, that he relies on mobility devices to ambulate, including at times, a rollator walker and/or wheelchair. In some of the federal ADA lawsuits, Rutherford is more precise with his alleged disability, claiming that he suffers from "spinal stenosis aggravated by a herniated disc" and an "arthritic condition in [his] thumbs, which interferes with [his] ability to grab, twist, and turn objects." Id, ¶21a.
- “Rutherford has been observed on multiple occasions, walking and ambulating without difficulty. Rutherford has been observed holding and/or using a cane, however Rutherford's use of a cane appears to be an accessory to his daily activities, rather than a device Rutherford relies upon to commence or complete his daily activities.” Id, ¶28.
- “On another occasion, Rutherford was observed leaving the MacArthur Centre (the former location of Manning Law), holding his cane (not relying on it) and walking down the middle of the flight of stairs to his vehicle in the parking lot. On that occasion, it was observed that Rutherford did not use the handicap lift near the stairwell, Rutherford did not use the handrails on either side of the flight of stairs, and Rutherford did not park in a handicapped designated parking space. Such behavior is inconsistent with the claims in Defendants' federal ADA lawsuits.” Id, ¶32.
“The People allege that Rutherford has not, and does not, use or rely upon a rollator walker or wheelchair.” Id, ¶33.
___________
Below is an excerpt from Mr. Rutherford's deposition taken in February, 2023. Is Mr. Rutherford an advocate for the disabled or is he a profiteer? You be the judge.
Examination by attorney Ara Sahelian:
____________
18 BY MR. SAHELIAN: Mr. Rutherford, are you
19 aware that there was a Complaint filed against you titled
20 People versus Rutherford, Case Number E073700 that
17:22 21 District Attorney Michael Hestrin, among others, Deputy
22 District Attorneys, filed a lawsuit against you? Are you
23 aware of that?
24 A. Oh, yeah you're talking about the one that got
25 thrown out of court; right?
1 Q. Well, it is no longer --
2 A. Yeah, that was dis --. Yeah --
3 MR. HASHEMI: Just answer the question,
4 Mr. Rutherford.
17:23 5 THE WITNESS: It was thrown out of court. It was
6 thrown out of court on three different levels. Is that
7 the one you're talking about?
8 MR. HASHEMI: Mr. Rutherford, you can just answer
9 the question. That's all.
10 Q. BY MR. SAHELIAN: Yeah. I'm just asking if
11 you're aware of it. That's all.
17:23 12 A. Yeah, I'm aware of it.
13 Q. Okay. And do you recall in the Complaint that
14 there was an allegation made that you were seen going up
15 and down stairs without the use of a mobility device?
16 You recall that?
17 MR. HASHEMI: Document speaks for itself.
18 Mr. Rutherford, the document speaks for itself. It's an
19 Unverified Complaint not supported by any admissible
20 facts. The question lacks foundation and is
17:23 21 argumentative.
22 MR. SAHELIAN: I'm just asking if he recalls that.
23 That's all.
24 Q. BY MR. SAHELIAN: I need a yes or a no.
25 A. No. No, I don't recall.
1 Q. You have no recollection?
2 A. Have no recollection.
3 Q. All right. And so my question to you is:
4 Have you gone up and down steps at any time in the last
17:24 5 five years without the use of a mobility device?
6 A. I -- I -- I. --
7 MR. HASHEMI: Objection.
8 THE WITNESS: I can't --. (Laughter.)
9 I don't recall going up and down stairs
10 without a mobility device, counselor.
11 Q. BY MR. SAHELIAN: Okay. I'll reask the
12 question slightly differently. Have you gone up and down
13 steps at any time in the last five years without relying
14 on a mobility device?
15 MR. HASHEMI: Objection, vague.
17:24 16 THE WITNESS: I don't --. Yeah. I don't recall
17 that either.
18 Q. BY MR. SAHELIAN: Okay. All right. I'll now
19 ask you the question slightly differently. Have you gone
20 up and down steps in the last five years at any time
21 using a cane?
22 MR. HASHEMI: Objection, vague.
23 THE WITNESS: Yep.
24 Q. BY MR. SAHELIAN: Your answer, please?
17:25 25 A. Can -- did you say steps, plural?
1 Q. Correct.
2 A. Possibly.
3 Q. You say possibly, and that means what? You
4 don't remember, you're not sure, or that it's -- you've
17:25 5 done it on occasion? Which one of the above?
6 A. No, it means I'm not sure.
7 Q. Have you on occasion gone up and down steps
8 without relying on a mobility device?
9 A. I don't think so. I'm not going to say no.
10 I'm going to say I don't think so.
17:26 11 Q. So if anybody accused you of that, that
12 accusation would be false; correct?
13 MR. HASHEMI: Objection, argumentative, lacks
14 foundation.
15 Q. BY MR. SAHELIAN: Your answer?
16 A. I don't know what --. What's -- what's the
17 accusation?
18 Q. That you went up and down steps or used steps
19 without relying on a mobility device.
20 ** MR. HASHEMI: I'm going to instruct him to not
21 answer the question.
17:26 22 At this point you're -- you're seeking to
23 corner him into a corner which there's no way to come out
24 of unscathed. So I'm going to instruct him not to answer
25 any more of this line of questioning. I'm going to move
1 for a protective order.
