Whitaker v. Grill Kebabs and Gyros, Inc.

Background

Brian Whitaker sued Grill Kebabs and Gyros, Inc., asserting a claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and a claim under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act. The court issued an order to show cause, meaning it required the plaintiff to explain why the court should take particular action.

Unruh Act Claim

The court stated that federal courts may decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction—the authority to hear related state-law claims—over a state-law claim in exceptional circumstances. It noted that, when a high-frequency litigant brings a California Unruh Act claim in federal court together with an ADA claim, this will typically be an exceptional circumstance supporting dismissal of the Unruh Act claim. The court therefore ordered Whitaker to show cause why it should not decline supplemental jurisdiction over that claim.

ADA Claim and Standing

The court also stated that federal courts must independently determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists. It ordered Whitaker to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of Article III standing, meaning the required connection between a plaintiff and an alleged injury that allows a federal court to decide the dispute.

Whitaker must submit a separate declaration sworn under penalty of perjury addressing his intent to return to the defendant's establishment. If the allegations are facially adequate, the defendant may conduct jurisdictional discovery about Whitaker's intent to return and whether he personally visited the establishment. The court also stated that it would likely schedule an in-person evidentiary hearing to evaluate the truthfulness of the jurisdictional allegations.

Required Declarations and Case Status

Whitaker's declaration must substantiate, in detail, his allegation that he visited the establishment in the first place. His counsel must submit a separate declaration describing, in detail, the investigation conducted to ensure that Whitaker visited the establishment and intends to return there.

Whitaker and his counsel must respond within 21 days of the order. Failure to respond will result in dismissal of the action with prejudice, according to the order. In the meantime, the court vacated all other deadlines and temporarily relieved the parties from the requirements of General Order 56. The order itself did not finally dismiss the action or decide the merits of either claim. Judge Vince Chhabria signed the order on April 19, 2022.