This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Civil Rights
ADA
Unfair Competition

James Paul Cox, an individual, on his own behalf and on behalf of the general public; David Quezada v. Harshad Patel, Hirsh Patel, Kumar Hirsh, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive

Published: Oct. 11, 2014 | Result Date: Dec. 23, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 2:13-cv-00323-BRO-JCG Bench Decision –  Defense

Court

USDC Central


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Christopher H. Knauf


Defendant

Victor J. Otten


Facts

James Cox and David Quezada filed a complaint against Harshad Patel, also known as Hirsh Patel and Kumar Hirsh.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
Cox alleged that he was confined to a wheelchair. Cox further alleged that he made a pre-paid reservation at the Value Inn Bellflower through the motel's website. Cox contended that when he made his reservation he indicated his preference for a wheelchair accessible room, but stated it was not necessary. Cox further contended that when he and his friend Quezada arrived at the motel, the defendants told them they could not stay, despite the pre-paid reservation. Cox and Quezada alleged that the defendants violated federal and state disability laws by unlawfully excluding persons with disabilities from the motel.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
Defendants argued that plaintiffs complaint should be dismissed because the federal jurisdiction was based on the Americans with Disabilities Act, which allows only for injunctive relief, and plaintiffs could not establish "a real and immediate threat of repeated injury."

Result

The court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss federal cause of action. The court found that plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to establish discrimination caused by the motel's website and the person who allegedly committed the discrimination was no longer employed at the motel.

Other Information

Plaintiff Cox re-filed his claims in state court and prevailed in a jury trial. Cox's motiond for injunction and attorney fees are pending. Defendants have appealed the verdict. FILING DATE: Jan. 16, 2013.


#108145

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390