Tito Vasquez v. Baskin Robbins Ice Cream No 116

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 20208:20-cv-00363California797 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 8:20-cv-00363-JLS-KES Date: February 25, 2020 Title: Tito Vasquez v. Baskin Robbins Ice Cream No 116 et al.

Present: HONORABLE JOSEPHINE L. STATON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Terry Guerrero N/A Deputy Clerk Court Reporter

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANT:

Not Present Not Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE

SUPPLEMENTAL JURISDICTION

The Complaint filed in this action asserts a claim for injunctive relief arising out of an alleged violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, a claim for damages pursuant to California’s Unruh Act, and other state-law claims. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why the Court should not decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s Unruh Act claim and other state-law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c). “In 2012, in an attempt to deter baseless claims and vexatious litigation, California adopted heightened pleading requirements for disability discrimination lawsuits under the Unruh…

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.