Attorneys Accused of Paying Plaintiffs Finder Fees in Alleged Racketeering Enterprise
The two attorneys are accused of filing 585 fraudulent lawsuits on behalf of eight plaintiffs alleging public accommodation violations under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
August 06, 2019 at 03:01 PM
4 minute read
Two lawyers are allegedly engaged in a civil racketeering enterprise that pays plaintiffs “finders fees” to file hundreds of disability discrimination suits for quick cash settlements, according to a new federal lawsuit.
The suit, filed Friday in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, accuses attorneys Craig Ehrlich, of Atlanta, and Douglas Schapiro, of Boca Raton, Florida, of filing fraudulent serial suits in a “money raking enterprise” that targets small businesses predominantly operated by minorities and immigrants, most of whom can’t afford to hire lawyers.
Atlanta attorney Hassan Elkhalil filed the racketeering lawsuit on behalf of Bhupendra Ghandi, the A&Y Family Group Inc. and PQV LLC.
The suit seeks certification as a class action on behalf of hundreds of businesses that have been sued by—and settled with—Erhlich and Schapiro. It also seeks restitution for the plaintiffs and an unspecified amount of damages, including treble damages associated with the alleged racketeering scheme.
The suit also names as defendants Ehrlich’s solo practice; Atlanta firm Ehrlich & Schapiro; and ADA Consultants of America, a Florida-based firm that Schapiro owns and operates.
The complaint also names as co-defendants eight clients of the two lawyers who have served as plaintiffs in 585 disability discrimination suits in Georgia.
The complaint alleges that the lawyers have filed 122 virtually identical suits in federal court in Colorado.
One defendant was listed as a plaintiff in 104 suits filed by Ehrlich or Schapiro, a second as a plaintiff in 106 cases, and a third in 121 cases, according to the complaint.
Erhlich has retained Atlanta attorney Bruce Brown, who called the suit “completely without merit.”
“The fact that there are so many lawsuits filed by Mr. Ehrlich and his firm is a reflection of the number of property owners who are in violation of the ADA, and those lawsuits, so long as the violations continue, will continue to be filed … just as with any other rampant civil wrong,” Brown said.
Erhlich’s cases are “entirely proper,” Brown said, and plaintiffs, who often act as “testers” to see if businesses are in compliance, “have real and actual injury under the law.”
“These cases are typically resolved in the form of consent decrees executed by federal judges after review and approval,” Brown added.
The Daily Report has reached out to Schapiro, who wasn’t in his Boca Raton office.
The primary purpose of the disability lawsuits Schapiro and Ehrlich filed is to generate quick cash settlements, according to the racketeering suit.
The suit claims that most of the defendant businesses “are pressured” to settle “because it is cheaper to settle than to litigate.” The suits are based on alleged violations of Americans with Disabilities Act provisions requiring appropriate public accommodations such as parking, ramps and restroom access for people with disabilities.
All of the lawyers’ disability discrimination suits have been settled and dismissed with prejudice without progressing beyond the initial filing of the complaint, the suit alleges.
The two attorneys allegedly recruited clients who “were sent to find violations” at the establishments to be sued, according to the lawsuit. The resulting complaints are “basic boilerplate narratives” listing standard ADA accessibility violations, according to the racketeering suit.
ADA plaintiffs received a “finder’s fee” for every complaint they agreed to appear on as a named plaintiff, the suit alleges. In return, they provided allegedly false testimony about visits to businesses and properties that Erhlich and Schapiro then sued.
The suit alleges that Schapiro’s consulting firm helped draft and supplement the complaints.
Elkhalil couldn’t be reached for comment. But the suit alleges that, when plaintiff Bhuendra Ghandi hired a lawyer and fought back, Erhlich dropped the case, according to the racketeering suit.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllVeteran Litigators Move From Sidley Austin to Alston & Bird's New Chicago Office
3 minute read'Pushed Into Oncoming Traffic': $5.85M Settlement in Mediated Auto Tort
6 minute readJustice Known for Asking 'Tough Questions' Resolves to Improve Civility
4 minute read'Nerve-Wracking': Fires Disrupting but Not Halting Work of Distributed Firms' LA Lawyers
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Legal Status of Presidential Diaries Must Be Clarified
- 2Litigators of the Week: Shortly After Name Partner Kathleen Sullivan’s Retirement, Quinn Emanuel Scores Appellate Win for Vimeo
- 3Litigator of the Week Runners-Up and Shout-Outs
- 4Weil Hires White & Case Partner in Rebuild of London Finance Ranks
- 5Morgan Lewis Closes Shenzhen Office After Less Than Two Years
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250