Love v. Skillman
- Donna Ryu
- 4:21-cv-02968
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Love v. Skillman, Judge Ryu ordered both sides to explain why the ADA case should not be paused pending Ninth Circuit decisions.
Samuel Love and Gary Skillman were required to respond to the court’s order explaining why the action should not be stayed pending related Ninth Circuit appeals.
What happened
In Love v. Skillman, Samuel Love alleges that Gary Skillman, doing business as The Northern Inn Motel, violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. Love says the motel’s reservation system did not describe accessibility features in enough detail.
The dispute concerns federal rules requiring lodging facilities to let people with disabilities reserve accessible rooms in the same way as other guests and to provide enough information about accessible features. The court noted that similar cases have reached different results and that related appeals were pending in the Ninth Circuit.
Judge Donna Ryu ordered Love and Skillman to submit written responses explaining why this case should not be paused while the Ninth Circuit considers those related appeals. Each party’s response was due September 10, 2021; the order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Love v. Skillman · No. 4:21-cv-02968
- Donna Ryu
- Sept. 3, 2021
Background
Samuel Love alleges that Gary Skillman, doing business as The Northern Inn Motel, violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. The complaint challenges the motel’s reservation system.
Legal issue identified by the court
The court described the dispute as involving the scope of the ADA regulations governing reservations systems for lodging facilities. The regulations require a covered lodging facility to allow people with disabilities to make reservations for accessible rooms during the same hours and in the same manner as people who do not need accessible rooms. They also require the facility to describe accessible features in enough detail to allow people with disabilities to independently assess whether a hotel or room meets their accessibility needs. The court referred to these requirements collectively as the “Reservations Rule.” Love alleges that Skillman’s reservation system violated that rule by failing to describe the motel’s accessibility features in sufficient detail.
Procedural history and ruling
The court noted that similar cases in federal district courts in California had produced different outcomes at the pleading stage. It also noted that the Ninth Circuit had not yet interpreted the Reservations Rule and that appeals were pending in two related cases addressing the issues raised by Love’s complaint.
The court issued an order to show cause, meaning it required the parties to explain why the case should not be stayed, or paused, pending a Ninth Circuit ruling in one or both of those appeals. The court ordered both parties to submit three-page written responses by September 10, 2021. The order did not resolve whether Love’s ADA or Unruh Act claims were legally sufficient and did not decide the merits of those claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.