Facts

Robert White, who alleged he is a bankruptcy lawyer, alleged that he wanted to use Square, Inc.'s platform to accept debit and credit card payment from his clients. According to White, Square's terms of service did not permit him to use Square's services in connection with his bankruptcy law practice. In federal court, White brought a purported class action against Square, alleging that its terms of service discriminated against White on the basis of his occupation, in violation of California's Unruh Civil Rights Act. The district court initially dismissed for lack of statutory standing, and, after the Ninth Circuit certified the question, the California Supreme Court reversed. White then voluntarily dismissed his federal complaint, and filed a new complaint in state court without a class action component. Square filed a demurrer.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that defendant discriminated against him because of his occupation as a bankruptcy attorney. According to plaintiff, that constituted intentional discrimination under the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant contended that plaintiff's new complaint was untimely. Defendant also claimed that plaintiff's complaint failed to allege facts to establish an Unruh Act claim, because he failed to allege that Square's terms of service intentionally discriminated against White based on his status as a bankruptcy attorney, and because the term of service was justified by legitimate business justifications.

Result

Defendant's demurrer was sustained without leave to amend after the court found plaintiff did not sufficiently allege that defendant's policy involved intentional discrimination, and that it was arbitrary and unreasonable.