Szwanek

Szwanek v. Jack in the Box, Inc.

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaSeptember 30, 20203:20-cv-02953California2,467 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

19 This putative class action alleges that defendants’ restaurants’ late-night practice of 20 providing service via “drive-thru” only, violates the Americans with Disabilities Act and the 21 Unruh Civil Rights Act, because it discriminates against visually impaired patrons, like 22 plaintiffs, who cannot drive because of their disability. The complaint seeks monetary, 23 declaratory, and injunctive relief. Defendants move to dismiss or, in the alternative, for 24 judgment on the pleadings. To the extent stated herein, defendants’ motion to dismiss is

GRANTED.

27 STATEMENT The following allegation are from the operative complaint (Dkt. No. 17). Defendant Jack in the Box, Inc. “owns, operates and/or leases Jack in the Box restaurants at thousands of locations throughout the United States.” Defendant Different Rules LLC became the successor company to Jack in the Box, Inc. in July 2019. Both companies have the right to enforce franchise agreements. Defendants Argo Hospitality Services, Inc., and Three Powers Foods, Inc. (hereinafter “franchisee defendants”) are California-based franchisees…

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.