Flowers

In the underlying action for disability discrimination, appellants John and Seth Flowers alleged that they were denied service at respondents’ restaurant due to John Flowers’s service dog. In sustaining a demurrer and granting summary adjudication in respondents’ favor, the trial court concluded that appellants could assert a claim under the Disabled Persons Act (DPA) (Civ. Code, §§ 54-55.3), but not under the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, §§ 51, 52). Following those rulings, at appellants’ request, the court dismissed their action with prejudice. We reverse the order of dismissal and remand.

RELEVANT FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Appellants’ complaint, filed September 26, 2012, contains cláims under the Unruh Act and the DPA, as well as claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent hiring, training, and supervision of employees. The complaint alleges that respondent Brinda Prasad owns respondent Valley India Café, Inc., which operates a restaurant in Canoga Park. The complaint further alleges that John is a disabled person with a licensed service dog, and that he and his son Seth have been denied service at the restaurant due to the…