Court Cases Giant Eagle

Get Your Legal Advice From Social Media – Go To Jail – ADA facemask case Pletcher V. Giant Eagle, Inc.

👉This page is following an ADA (facemask) legal action filed in the Western District of Pennsylvania, Pletcher V. Giant Eagle, Inc.

This case represents the very reason it is necessary to shine a spotlight on fraudulent disability exemptions. Although this case consolidates many plaintiffs into one case, we are currently focusing on the claims made by Josiah Kostek.

Per the complaint, a maskless Josiah Kostek entered a store that required facemasks (Giant Eagle). The store did not allow him to shop and called the police. Josiah was arrested. He returned and again entered the store maskless while claiming he was protected under the ADA. The police were called and Josiah was told that he was not welcome back.

The complaint alleges that Josiah suffers from numerous physical and mental conditions that prevent him from wearing a mask.

👨‍⚖️In July Josiah was convicted of the charges filed under the arrest.

The store, in its response to Josiah’s legal filing, expose his Facebook activity which does not align with his claims. He states, “I don’t mind wearing a mask, if someone asks me polite. I’m in excellent health…” He goes on to discuss what he believes are his legal rights not to buy masks. He claims he will not wear a mask or social distance. “Anyone that tries to take that for me is a tyrant.” In a recording supplied to the court, Josiah compares face covering policies to baby killing women who get away with the “murder” of “innocent babies”. He says, “My body. My Choice.”

This information takes us beyond the question of whether Josiah has a legitimate disability that would allow special treatment inside a private business. Josiah’s disability claims and the subsequent information that was uncovered, causes damage to the disabled community as a whole. It inspires a belief that individuals with disabilities take advantage of their status to seek accommodations they do not deserve. And in this case, are perceived by many as harmful to the public interest. In its August 3 filing, the store indicates it will pursue a motion to dismiss.

Information regarding cases filed in federal court are accessible to the public via Pacer

%d bloggers like this: