Calcano v. Hooters of America, LLC

Background

Marcos Calcano filed the action for himself and all other persons similarly situated. He asserted claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. The complaint concerned Hooters of America LLC’s alleged failure to carry braille gift cards.

Calcano and other visually impaired plaintiffs had filed several substantially identical lawsuits against stores and restaurants. Hooters moved to dismiss the First Amended Complaint for lack of standing and failure to state a claim. The court administratively terminated that motion and stayed the case while the Second Circuit considered appeals from dismissals in five similar cases.

Court’s analysis

On June 2, 2022, the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissals in the related cases. It held that the “conclusory, boilerplate allegations” in the nearly identical complaints did not establish standing. Standing is the legal requirement that a plaintiff show a sufficient personal connection to the alleged harm to invoke the court’s jurisdiction.

The district court determined that Calcano’s First Amended Complaint was substantially identical to the complaints the Second Circuit had found insufficient. The court also explained that it has an independent duty to examine whether it has subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning authority to hear the case, and to dismiss when that authority is lacking.

Disposition

The court ordered that the case be dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing. Calcano may file a second amended complaint within 15 days. If he does not timely file one, the case will be dismissed with prejudice. The order did not decide the merits of Calcano’s disability-discrimination claims.