George Austin v. Kemper Corporation

facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678

(2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter,

accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face” (citation and

internal quotation marks omitted)); Evans v. McKay, 869 F.2d 1341, 1344 (9th Cir.

1989) (in a 42 U.S.C. § 1981 action, “plaintiffs must show intentional

discrimination on account of race”); Munson v. Del Taco, Inc., 208 P.3d 623, 628-

30 (Cal. 2009) (to state a claim under the Unruh Act, a plaintiff must plead

intentional discrimination unless they also establish a violation of the Americans

with Disabilities Act).

The district court properly dismissed Austin’s breach of contract claims

because Austin failed to allege facts sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a

contract between himself and Kemper Corporation that would cover the injuries he

asserts. See CDF Firefighters v. Maldonado, 70 Cal. Rptr. 3d 667, 679 (Ct. App.

2008) (setting forth elements of a breach of contract claim under California law).

2 22-15113 The district court properly dismissed Austin’s claim alleging…