SAN JOSE, Calif. (AP) — Trying to persuade a jury to make his day, Clint Eastwood said he wanted to make a hotel he owns accessible to the disabled but was constrained by his need to preserve the property's historic character.
Eastwood testified for more than two hours Thursday in a federal lawsuit brought against him by a woman with muscular dystrophy. Diane zum Brunnen, 51, claims the actor-director's Mission Ranch just outside Carmel was not fully accessible to her wheelchair. She is seeking unspecified damages.
Eastwood, who harshly criticized the case in a congressional hearing in May, was calm and almost soft-spoken as he told of how he spent millions renovating the 150-year-old former dairy farm he bought in 1987.
He said he thought it would be possible to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and similar California laws while still preserving the historic flavor of the property.
"Because it is an old place, we had a certain obligation to the heritage and antique value, not just the ADA," Eastwood said.Zum Brunnen's attorney, John Burris, asked Eastwood whether he developed any expertise in construction codes as mayor of Carmel from 1986 to 1988 and as a film director who had sets built.
Eastwood, 70, said he was familiar with building regulations but didn't consider himself an expert. He said he delegated the details of the renovations of Mission Ranch to a contractor.
Zum Brunnen claims her rights were violated when she and her husband had dinner at the hotel in 1996. Among their complaints: The wheelchair-accessible bathroom for the restaurant was more than 200 feet away; the lone guest room for the disabled was $225, when other rooms were as low as $85; and there was no ramp to the main office.
Eastwood acknowledges the problems but says he was not given a fair chance to improve access at Mission Ranch before he was sued.
Under questioning from Burris, Eastwood said a wheelchair ramp could have been added to the office as far back as 1992, when other work was being done.
"We were so busy restoring and repairing the place," Eastwood said, explaining why a ramp wasn't added. "This is an ongoing process and it's an ongoing process today."
Eastwood attorney Chuck Keller says the zum Brunnens cannot prove they went to Mission Ranch on the day they allege and if they did, they went merely to find grounds for a lawsuit. He pointed out that the couple had also filed a complaint against another hotel.
In zum Brunnen's time on the stand Thursday, Keller asked her to explain inconsistencies in her testimony and pretrial depositions, especially about the timing of a picture they say they took to show the office did not have a ramp.
On the Net: Department of Justice's site on the ADA: www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/adahom1.htm