Lamar Myers v. An Long Corp

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 12, 20242:24-cv-01946California505 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAMAR MYERS 2:24−cv−01946−DSF−AJR Plaintiff(s),

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v. AN LONG CORP, et al. Defendant(s).

The Complaint filed in this action asserts a claim for injunctive relief arising out of an alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12010-12213, and a claim for damages pursuant to California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act (Unruh Act), Cal. Civ. Code §§ 51-53. It appears that the Court possesses only supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim, and any other state law claim that plaintiff may have alleged pursuant to the Court’s supplemental jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). The supplemental jurisdiction statute “reflects the understanding that, when deciding whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, 'a federal court should consider and weigh in each case, and at every stage of the litigation, the values of judicial economy, convenience, fairness, and comity.”’ City of Chicago v. Int’l Coll. of Surgeons, 522 U.S. 156, 173 (1997) (emphasis added) (quoting Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350 (1988)). California has a statutory…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.