A lawsuit filed in federal court claims that a local restaurant operator has failed to comply with requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act, resulting in barriers that allegedly prevent full access for individuals with mobility impairments. The complaint was submitted by Solomon Stanley on March 19, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against Trujillo Dulce Rodrigiuez, identified as the owner or operator of The Taquiera La Tecampana restaurant.
According to the filing, Stanley is a resident of Powder Springs, Georgia who suffers from mobility issues and uses prescribed knee braces and a cane. He states that he is substantially limited in performing major life activities such as ambulating unassisted and can only walk short distances. Stanley reports that he frequently visits The Taquiera La Tecampana restaurant at 1936 Veterans Highway in Austell, Georgia, which he describes as a place of public accommodation subject to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The complaint details an incident on November 8, 2025, when Stanley visited the restaurant and encountered what he describes as numerous architectural barriers. He alleges these conditions restrict his access to goods and services offered at the property. Among the specific issues cited are lack of signage indicating accessible parking, faded markings for designated accessible parking spaces, an accessible ramp extending into an access aisle making it unusable, disrepair and hazards associated with the ramp, excessive gaps at its base creating further hazards, absence of accessible seating inside the restaurant including booths and bar sections, and several restroom violations affecting both men’s and women’s facilities.
Stanley claims that these conditions violate standards set forth in federal regulations governing accessibility for individuals with disabilities. “There are numerous architectural barriers present at The Taquiera La Tecampana restaurant that prevent and/or restrict access by Plaintiff,” the complaint states. He further asserts that “Plaintiff personally suffered discrimination because of his disability” due to these alleged deficiencies.
The legal arguments presented in the filing contend that it would be readily achievable for the defendant to remove these architectural barriers as required by law. The complaint references several provisions under federal statutes and regulations—specifically citing obligations under 28 C.F.R. sections related to accessible design—and maintains that failure to address these issues constitutes a pattern or practice of discrimination within the meaning of relevant sections of U.S. Code.
Stanley also argues that he has standing not only regarding barriers he personally encountered but also those affecting other mobility-impaired patrons at the premises. “Plaintiff has standing to sue for every barrier to access for the mobility-impaired that exists on the subject premises,” according to court documents.
As relief from the court, Stanley requests a declaration that Defendant has violated Title III of the ADA by failing to bring The Taquiera La Tecampana into compliance where it is readily achievable or by not taking other measures necessary to remove architectural barriers when full compliance is not possible. He asks for an order requiring all alterations needed to make facilities accessible or otherwise modifying policies or procedures so all goods and services are available equally to individuals with disabilities.
In addition to injunctive relief aimed at correcting alleged violations or potentially closing the facility until compliance is achieved, Stanley seeks attorney’s fees, costs, litigation expenses pursuant to statutory provisions under 42 U.S.C., as well as any other appropriate relief deemed just by the court.
The case was filed by attorney Pete M. Monismith (Georgia Bar 941228), who represents Solomon Stanley in this matter. The case identification number is 1:26-cv-01495-MLB.
Source: 126cv01495_Solomon_Stanley_v_Trujillo_Dulce_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Georgia.pdf
