Johnson v. GTD Ventures, LLC

Background

Scott Johnson, who uses a wheelchair for mobility, brought claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. He alleged that GTD Ventures, LLC and Visible Vibrations, LLC failed to provide accessible door hardware at Visible Vibrations, located at 1618 S. El Camino Real in San Mateo, California.

Visible Vibrations and GTD Ventures initially answered through the same lawyer. The lawyer later withdrew from representing Visible Vibrations. Because Visible Vibrations is a corporation and can appear in court only through a licensed lawyer, the court directed it to obtain new counsel. Visible Vibrations did not make a later appearance and did not respond to an order requiring it to explain why default should not be entered.

Johnson and GTD Ventures filed a stipulation seeking dismissal, but Visible Vibrations had filed an answer and had not signed the stipulation. The court therefore required Johnson to seek a court-ordered dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). Johnson’s revised motion asked the court to dismiss the ADA claim with prejudice and the Unruh Act claim without prejudice to refiling in state court. Visible Vibrations did not oppose the motion.

ADA Claim

The court held that Visible Vibrations’s permanent closure made Johnson’s request for injunctive relief under the ADA moot. The court explained that federal courts may decide only actual, ongoing disputes and that a request for an injunction becomes moot when the business has ceased operating because the threat of future injury has ended.

Because the ADA claim was moot, the court concluded that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over that claim. It dismissed Johnson’s ADA claim with prejudice and directed that judgment be entered on it.

Unruh Act Claim

The Unruh Act claim was before the federal court through supplemental jurisdiction, which allows a federal court to hear related state-law claims in some circumstances. After dismissing the federal ADA claim, the court declined to continue exercising supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining Unruh Act claim.

The court granted dismissal of the Unruh Act claim without prejudice to refiling in state court. It found that Visible Vibrations had not shown plain legal prejudice or unfair harm from the dismissal. The court noted that having to defend a possible case in another forum, without more, does not constitute the kind of legal prejudice that would prevent voluntary dismissal.

Disposition

The court granted Johnson’s motion to dismiss. Johnson’s ADA claim was dismissed with prejudice, and his Unruh Act claim was dismissed without prejudice to refiling in state court. The court entered judgment on the ADA claim.