UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY PIKEVILLE DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) No.

: versus ) ) COMPLAINT DAYS INNS OF AMERICA, INC., ) HOSPITALITY FRANCHISE ) SYSTEMS, INC., ) HAZARD MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC., ) J. DOUGLAS KIDD, and ) NAPIER-SEBASTIAN CONSTRUCTION, ) ) Defendants. ) ) The United States of America alleges: 1. This action is brought by the United States to enforce title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (the "ADA" or the "Act"), 42 U.S.C. SS 12181 through 12189, against a. Days Inns of America, Inc. ("DIA"), the licensor of the Days Inn chain of economy hotels, including a Days Inn hotel at 359 Morton Boulevard in Hazard, Kentucky; b. Hospitality Franchise Systems, Inc. ("HFS"), the parent company of defendant DIA; c. Hazard Management Group, Inc., ("Hazard Management Group"), the owner of the Days Inn hotel in Hazard; d. J. Douglas Kidd, ("Kidd"), the architect of and for the Days Inn hotel in Hazard; and e. Napier-Sebastian Construction ("NapierSebastian"), the general contractor of and for the Days Inn hotel in Hazard. 01-01272​ 2. This court has jurisdiction of this action under 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(1)(B) and 28 U.S.C. SS 1331 and 1345. The court may grant declaratory and other relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. SS 2201 and 2202. 3. Defendant HFS is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 339 Jefferson Road, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054. 4. Defendant DIA is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 339 Jefferson Road, Parsippany,

New Jersey 07054. Defendant DIA is a wholly owned subsidiary of defendant HFS. 5. Defendant Hazard Management Group is a Kentucky corporation with its principal place of business at 359 Morton Boulevard, Hazard, Kentucky 41701. 6. Defendant Kidd is an individual who resides or has his principal place of business at 956 Jane Drive, Xenia, Ohio 45385. 7. Defendant Napier-Sebastian is an Ohio partnership with its principal place of business at 951 Amlin Drive, Xenia, Ohio 45385. 8. Venue is proper in this district. A substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to this action occurred in this district. In addition, defendant Hazard Management Group resides in this district. 9. Defendant DIA and, upon information and belief, defendant HFS, operate a system of approximately 1,500 hotels Complaint Page 2 01-01273​throughout the United States under various trade and service names and marks including "Days Inn," "Days Hotel," "Days Suites," "DayStops," "Days Lodge," and others (collectively, the "Days Inn system"). Defendants DIA and HFS do not own any of the hotels that participate in the Days Inn system; rather, DIA has entered into and maintains license agreements (the "license agreements") with the owners or the agents of the owners of each facility that participates in the Days Inn system. 10. One of the hotels in the Days Inn system is the newly constructed Days Inn hotel at 359 Morton Boulevard in Hazard, Kentucky, (the "Hazard Days Inn" or "the hotel"). 11. The Hazard Days Inn is a non-residential facility whose operations affect commerce. As such, it is a commercial facility within the meaning of section 303(a) of the Act. 42 U.S.C. S 12183(a). In addition, because the Hazard Days Inn is a place of lodging, it is also a public accommodation within the meaning of section 303(a) of the Act. Id. 12. The last building permit for the Hazard Days Inn was applied for on or about April 28, 1993. 13. The first certificate of occupancy for the Hazard Days Inn was issued on or about January 3, 1994. 14. Defendant Hazard Management Group is a private entity which owns the Hazard Days Inn. Defendant Hazard Management Group initiated, contracted for, or participated in all aspects of the design and construction of the hotel. Complaint Page 3 01-01274​ 15. Defendant Kidd is an individual engaged in the business of providing architectural and design specification services.

Kidd participated in the design and construction of the Hazard Days Inn by designing the hotel. 16. Defendant Napier-Sebastian is a private entity engaged in the business of providing general contracting services. Napier-Sebastian participated in the design and construction of the Hazard Days Inn by constructing the hotel pursuant to a contract with defendant Hazard Management Group, serving as general contractor for the hotel. 17. Defendants DIA and HFS controlled or participated in the design and construction of the Hazard Days Inn. Among other things, DIA or HFS or both of them a. developed standard site plans, building plans, room details, and other architectural drawings and specifications for new Days Inn facilities; b. by means of the license agreement, required defendant Hazard Management Group to design the hotel to conform to the plans, drawings, and specifications contained in the design standards prepared by DIA and HFS; c. by means of the license agreement, required defendant Hazard Management Group, prior to construction of the Hazard Days Inn, to submit to DIA for DIA's review and approval, the facility's site plan, working drawings, and detail specifications; Complaint Page 4 01-01275​ d. reviewed and approved the site plan, working drawings, and detail specifications for the Hazard Days Inn prior to construction; e. by means of the license agreement, required defendant Hazard Management Group to construct the Hazard Days Inn in accord with the plans, drawings, and specifications approved by DIA; f. by means of the license agreement, required defendant Hazard Management Group upon completion of construction, to obtain from DIA a final approval of the facility before the hotel could begin operating as part of the Days Inn system; and g. upon information and belief, have inspected the Hazard Days Inn on several occasions since its completion. 18. The Hazard Days Inn is not readily accessible to or usable by individuals with disabilities, as required by section 303(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. S 12183(a)(1). The hotel fails in numerous respects to comply with the Department of Justice's regulation implementing title III of the ADA, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, ("the regulation"), including the Standards for Accessible Design, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, Appendix A ("the Standards"). See 28

C.F.R. SS 36.401, 36.406. 19. Illustrative examples of the failures of the Hazard Days Inn to comply with the requirements of the Act, the regulation, and the Standards include, but are not limited to, Complaint Page 5 01-01276​the items set forth below. "Accessible," as used below, means "readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities," as required by section 303(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. S 12183(a)(1), and as specified by the Standards. a. Guests with disabilities at the Hazard Days Inn do not have a choice of sleeping accommodations equivalent to that afforded to other guests. The hotel has standard-sized guest rooms with two beds, larger guest rooms (referred to as "suites") with oversized whirlpool tubs, and guest rooms with kitchenettes, but all of the guest rooms designated for use by individuals with disabilities are standard-sized, have only one bed, and have neither oversized whirlpool tubs nor kitchenettes. See Standards S 9.1.4. b. The hotel has too few accessible guest rooms. Hotels with more than 50 sleeping rooms are required to provide, in addition to the standard accessible guest rooms, at least one accessible guest room with a roll-in shower, for use by individuals who cannot transfer from a wheelchair into a bathtub. With 60 guest rooms, the Hazard Days Inn is required to have four accessible guest rooms, including one with a roll-in shower, but it has only three rooms designated for use by individuals with disabilities, none of which has a roll-in shower. See Standards S 9.1.2. c. The guest rooms that are designated for use by individuals with disabilities are not accessible, because Complaint Page 6 01-01277​ various operating controls, mechanisms, and features are mounted too high to be reached by an individual using a wheelchair, are blocked by the placement of the beds, tables, or other furniture, or require tight grasping, pinching, or twisting of the wrist, which is difficult or impossible for individuals with limited manual dexterity, including many individuals with paraplegia or quadriplegia. As a result, many individuals with disabilities will not be able, in these guest rooms, to lock the deadbolt on the guest room door, to turn on or off the table and bedside lamps, operate or control the room's heating and airconditioning unit, or use the clothes rod and shelves. See Standards SS 4.25.3, 4.27.4. d. The bathrooms in the guest rooms designated

accessible are not accessible, because there is inadequate clear floor space for an individual using a wheelchair to be able to turn around after entering the bathroom, because the toilets are not properly located, and because there is inadequate clear floor space at the bathtubs. As a result, many individuals using wheelchairs will not be able to approach these fixtures closely enough, making it difficult and potentially hazardous to use these fixtures, as individuals may fall while attempting to use a fixture that has inadequate space, or from an awkward position. See Standards S 4.23.3. Complaint Page 7 01-01278​ e. The doors to the bathrooms in the standard guest rooms -- that is, the guest rooms that are not designated for use by individuals with disabilities -- are too narrow. If someone who uses a wheelchair must stay in a nonaccessible guest room (if, for instance, the accessible guest rooms are already taken), or visits another guest in a non-accessible guest room, he or she will not be able even to enter the bathroom in that room. See Standards S 9.4. f. The hotel's stairways do not have cane-detectable barriers to prevent people who are blind or who have low vision from walking into the underside of those stairways. (A cane-detectable barrier can consist of any object that a person using a cane can detect before running into the stairway, such as a railing or a curb.) See Standards S 4.4.2. g. Several rooms and spaces at the hotel -- including the conference room, the lobby restroom, the restroom adjoining the conference room, the vending machine room, the hotel laundry, and the linen storage area, among others -do not have visual alarms to alert individuals who are deaf or hard-of-hearing to smoke, fire, or other emergencies in the hotel. See Standards SS 9.1.2, 9.1.3, 9.3. h. The restroom in the hotel lobby is not accessible, because it is too small to allow an individual using a wheelchair to turn around after entering the restroom, Complaint Page 8 01-01279​ because the toilet is improperly positioned, is too low, and has no grab bars, because the lavatory is too low to allow adequate knee clearance for an individual using a wheelchair, because the lavatory has hardware that requires tight grasping and twisting of the wrist, so that individuals with limited manual dexterity will not be able to turn on and off the water, and because the paper towel

dispenser is located too high to be reached by many individuals using wheelchairs. See Standards S S 4.16, 4.19, 4.22.3, 4.27.3. 20. The failures of the defendants to design and construct the Hazard Days Inn to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities constitute a pattern or practice of discrimination within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(1)(B)(i) and 28 C.F.R. S 36.503(a). 21. In addition to constituting a pattern or practice of discrimination, the failures of the defendants to design and construct the Hazard Days Inn to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities constitute unlawful discrimination that raises an issue of general public importance within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(1)(B)(ii) and 28 C.F.R. S 36.503(b). Complaint Page 9 01-01280​ PRAYER FOR RELIEF The United States prays that the Court: A. Declare that the defendants have violated title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. SS 12181 through 12189, and the regulations thereunder, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, by failing to design and construct a new facility for first occupancy after January 26, 1993, that is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities; B. Order the defendants to undertake whatever repairs, rebuilding, or other remedial steps are necessary to bring the Hazard Days Inn into full compliance with the requirements of title III of the ADA and the Department of Justice's regulation implementing title III, including the Standards for Accessible Design; C. With respect to any facilities that they may design and construct in the future, order the defendants to design and construct those facilities in such a manner that they will be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, as required by section 303(a) of title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. S 12183(a), sections 36.401 and 36.406 of the title III regulation, 28 C.F.R. S S 36.401 and 36.406, and the Standards for Accessible Design, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, Appendix A; D. Assess a civil penalty against each defendant in an amount authorized by 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(2)(c), to vindicate the public interest; and Complaint Page 10 01-01281 E. Order such other appropriate relief as the interests of justice may require.

JANET RENO Attorney General By: DEVAL L. PATRICK Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division JOHN L. WODATCH, Chief L. IRENE BOWEN, Deputy Chief Disability Rights Section Civil Rights Division THOMAS M. CONTOIS ALYSE S. BASS KEN S. NAKATA Attorneys Disability Rights Section Civil Rights Section U.S. Department of Justice Post Office Box 66738 Washington, D.C. 20035-6738 (202) 514-6014 (202) 616-9511 (202) 307-2232 Complaint Page 11 01-01282