Gomez v. Turnbull Wine Cellars
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:22-cv-00533
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Gomez v. Turnbull Wine Cellars, Judge Chhabria lifted the order to show cause, kept the Unruh claim, rejected current jurisdictional dismissal, and reserved ADA sufficiency.
Andres Gomez and Turnbull Wine Cellars.
What happened
In Gomez v. Turnbull Wine Cellars, Andres Gomez alleged that Turnbull Wine Cellars’s website was inaccessible and brought claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act.
The court said the Unruh claim could not be dismissed on the proposed exceptional-circumstances ground because the claim concerned a website, not a construction-related accessibility problem. It also found no current basis to dismiss the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and did not order jurisdictional discovery. The court expressed doubt about whether the complaint adequately stated an Americans with Disabilities Act claim but left that issue for later.
Judge Vince Chhabria lifted the order to show cause and ordered a status report by October 18, 2022. The court left the Americans with Disabilities Act issue for summary judgment or a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
The detailed version
- Gomez v. Turnbull Wine Cellars · No. 3:22-cv-00533
- Vince Chhabria
- July 18, 2022
Background
Andres Gomez asserted claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act based on an allegation that Turnbull Wine Cellars’s website was inaccessible. The order concerned an order to show cause and addressed whether the Unruh Act claim should be dismissed, whether the case should be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and whether jurisdictional discovery was appropriate.
Unruh Act Claim
The court explained that when a “high-frequency” litigant brings a California Unruh Act claim in federal court together with an ADA claim, exceptional circumstances may sometimes justify dismissing the Unruh Act claim. But the court said that circumstance applies only when the plaintiff has asserted a construction-related accessibility claim. Because Gomez’s claim concerned an inaccessible website rather than a construction-related accessibility problem, the court held that there were no exceptional circumstances justifying dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(4).
Jurisdiction and ADA Claim
The court said the low threshold for standing to seek an injunction in an ADA website-accessibility case gave it no basis, at that time, to dismiss the claim for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also said jurisdictional discovery did not appear likely to help, although Turnbull Wine Cellars could request it by filing a motion that explained a basis for the request.
The court expressed skepticism that the complaint adequately stated an ADA claim because it did not explain how the website’s alleged shortcomings prevented Gomez from visiting Turnbull Wine Cellars’s physical location or accessing its goods or services. The court did not decide that issue in this order. Because the defendant had filed an answer, the court left the issue for summary judgment or a motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Disposition
Judge Vince Chhabria lifted the order to show cause. The court did not dismiss the Unruh Act claim on the stated exceptional-circumstances ground, found no current basis for dismissal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, and left the adequacy of the ADA claim for later proceedings. A status report was due by October 18, 2022.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.