Johnson v. Smith

Background Scott Johnson sued Daniel H. Smith, Wilma Smith, and other defendants. He alleged that they violated the Americans with Disabilities Act and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act by failing to provide wheelchair-accessible parking at their business.

Mootness issue On August 31, Johnson filed a notice stating that the defendants had provided sufficient evidence that the business had fully corrected the barriers listed in his complaint. Johnson said this suggested that his request for an order requiring accessibility improvements was no longer a live dispute. The court explained that when a defendant corrects all alleged disability-access violations, the claim may become moot, meaning there is no longer a live controversy, and the plaintiff may lose the legal right to pursue it. In that situation, the court may no longer have authority to hear the federal disability claim.

State-law claim and order The court stated that it could hear Johnson’s Unruh Act claim only through supplemental jurisdiction, which is a court’s authority to hear a related state-law claim alongside a federal claim. Judge Thomas S. Hixson ordered Johnson to show cause—explain why the court should not find the federal claim moot and decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claim. Johnson was ordered to respond by September 14, 2022. This order did not itself dismiss either claim or issue a final ruling on the merits.