Gannon v. JBJ Holdings LLC

Background

Stephen Gannon sued JBJ Holdings LLC and Grand Street Donuts Inc. on behalf of himself and others similarly situated. He alleged that he is an amputee who uses a wheelchair and that the entrance to the defendants’ donut shop at 351 Grand St. in New York lacked required accessibility features, including handrails and sufficient maneuvering clearance.

The complaint asserted claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. Gannon sought injunctive and declaratory relief requiring changes to the premises, damages under the New York laws, punitive damages under the New York City law, and attorney fees and costs.

The defendants were served but did not answer. The Clerk issued certificates of default, and Gannon moved for a default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2). The defendants also did not appear at the hearing on that motion.

Standing and jurisdiction

Before entering a judgment, the court examined whether Gannon had Article III standing. Standing is the constitutional requirement that a plaintiff show a concrete and personal injury, a connection between that injury and the defendant’s conduct, and a likelihood that a favorable court decision would remedy the injury. Because Gannon sought an injunction, he also had to show a real and immediate threat of being injured again.

The court held that Gannon’s allegations were too conclusory to establish standing. Although he alleged that he encountered violations and had difficulty accessing the premises, he did not say when the encounter occurred or explain specifically how the barriers caused his difficulty. The court also found that the complaint did not support a reasonable inference that he intended to return. Gannon did not allege that he intended to return, describe the frequency of his past visits, explain what was distinctive about the donut shop, or provide facts showing that he lived sufficiently close to it or would return soon after the barriers were removed.

The court stated that the New York State and New York City claims were subject to the same standing requirements. Because Gannon lacked standing under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the court concluded that he also lacked standing to bring the state and city claims.

Disposition

The court concluded that Gannon lacked standing to assert any claim and that the court therefore lacked jurisdiction over the case. It dismissed the complaint without prejudice and denied Gannon’s motion for default judgment without prejudice. The court gave Gannon 30 days from the order’s date to amend the complaint. If he did not amend within that period, or obtain an extension, the court stated that it would close the case. The Clerk was directed to close the docket entry for the default-judgment motion.