April 18, 2014

Be Prepared: New Commercial Lease Disclosure Requirements Under California Disability Access Laws Take Effect July 1, 2013

In the fall of 2012, California Governor Jerry Brown signed Senate Bill 1186 (SB 1186). Among other things, SB 1186 reforms California’s disability access laws by: (1) banning pre-lawsuit letters from lawyers demanding money; (2) creating new provisions to prevent “stacking” of multiple claims to increase statutory damages; and (3) requiring that demand letters identify the barriers that prevented full and equal access to the business premises or services, as well as the dates the disabled person encountered those barriers. The new law also reduces the amount of statutory damages available for unintentional violations of the law in certain circumstances, if the necessary changes are made soon after a suit is filed. 

SB 1186 additionally amends California Civil Code § 1938 and imposes a new disclosure duty on commercial landlords. For all commercial property leases entered into on or after July 1, 2013, the landlord must disclose in the lease: (1) whether the leased premises have been inspected by a Certified Access Specialist (CASp) and if so, (2) whether the leased premises have (or have not) been determined to meet all applicable construction-related access standards under California law. Under certain circumstances, a CASp inspection may be useful to limit the statutory damages that a plaintiff may recover in a disability access case.

©2014 Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

About the Author

Dustin Branch, Partner, Katten Muchin Rosenman Law Firm

Dustin Branch concentrates his practice in the representation of landlords and other creditors in chapter 11 bankruptcy cases and non-bankruptcy workouts, as well as in other matters surrounding the sale, lease or restructuring of distressed real estate. Mr. Branch regularly represents shopping center owners, managers, developers and management companies in retail bankruptcies in bankruptcy courts throughout the United States, including in California, New York and Delaware. He has extensive experience representing multiple locations in some of the largest retail bankruptcy cases in the...


About the Author

Brian Huben, Partner, Katten Muchin Rosenman Law Firm

Brian D. Huben concentrates his practice in commercial litigation in state and federal courts. His practice focuses on the representation of commercial landlords and shopping center owners, managers and developers. Brian represents landlords and other creditors throughout the US in retailer bankruptcies, often providing counsel to dozens of shopping center owners in each case. He also counsels commercial landlords in day-to-day operational matters such as evictions, breach of lease issues, public access and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Stacey Knight, partner, Katten Muchin Rosenman Law Firm

Stacey McKee Knight is a member of Katten’s Board of Directors and the firm’s Executive Committee. She concentrates her litigation practice in the areas of labor and employment law. Stacey represents management in a variety of labor relations matters, including collective bargaining, arbitration, picketing and leafleting, injunction proceedings and unfair labor practice charges. She also represents employers in litigation and day-to-day preventive counseling, including hiring, promotion, disability accommodation and termination of their employees and compliance with local,...


Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.