Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled June 24, 2024

Sherry v. Montage Health

Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Docket
4:24-cv-00755
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
DiscoveryADA / Disability
In one sentence

In Jackson Sherry v. Montage Health, Judge Tse granted in part a motion to compel a disability-access site inspection at the hospital.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Jackson Sherry and the defendants, including Montage Health. The order requires the defendants to schedule a joint inspection of the hospital areas identified in the complaint and leaves open a separate request for areas outside that scope.

What happened

Jackson Sherry asked the court to require a joint inspection of parts of the Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula in his case against Montage Health and other defendants. The dispute concerned which areas could be inspected under General Order 56.

The court held that the inspection could include barriers and areas identified in the complaint, even if Sherry had not personally encountered every barrier, so long as they related to his disability. Areas not identified in the complaint were outside the scope of an inspection under that order, although Sherry could request those areas under another discovery rule.

The court granted Sherry’s motion to compel in part and denied the remainder without prejudice. It ordered the defendants to schedule an inspection covering the barriers and areas identified in the complaint by July 24, 2024. Judge Alex G. Tse issued the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Sherry v. Montage Health · No. 4:24-cv-00755
Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Date
June 24, 2024

Background

The order resolves a discovery dispute about Sherry’s motion to compel a joint site inspection of the Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula, referred to as CHOMP. The parties disagreed about the inspection’s scope, which was governed by General Order 56.

Sherry sought an inspection of several areas of CHOMP. The opinion states that an Americans with Disabilities Act plaintiff who has standing based on at least one barrier at a public accommodation may challenge, in one lawsuit, other barriers at that facility that relate to the plaintiff’s specific disability, including barriers the plaintiff did not personally encounter.

Scope of the Inspection

General Order 56 limits a joint site inspection to portions or aspects of the premises claimed to violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. The court concluded that this scope covered the barriers and areas identified in Sherry’s complaint. The opinion’s footnote identifies apparent examples as the garage and street-level parking areas, the curved ramp and door to the Comprehensive Cancer Center, the path of travel to the main entrance, the main entrance, and areas described in paragraph 21 of the complaint.

The court concluded that General Order 56 did not authorize inspection of areas that were not identified in the complaint. It noted that Sherry could request inspection of those additional areas under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 34.

Ruling

The court granted Sherry’s motion to compel the joint site visit under General Order 56 in part and denied the remainder of the motion without prejudice. Defendants were ordered to schedule the joint inspection of CHOMP by July 24, 2024, and the inspection must include all barriers and areas identified in the complaint. Judge Alex G. Tse signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.