A.P. v. Glendale Unified School District

Filing 72

JUDGMENT by Judge George H. Wu, in favor of Glendale Unified School District against A.P. Related to: Order on Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, 69 . (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (Attachments: # 1 part 2) (mrgo)

Download PDF
JS-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 A.P., a minor, by and through his guardian ad litem, C.P., Plaintiff, 13 14 CASE NO. CV 16-1404-GW(FFMx) [Assigned to the Hon. George H. Wu] JUDGMENT v. DATE: TIME: CTRM: GLENDALE UNIFIED SCHOOL 15 DISTRICT, AND DOES 1-10 inclusive, APRIL 17, 2017 8:30 A.M. 10 16 17 Defendants. 18 19 Defendant GLENDALE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT’s (the “School 20 District”) Motion for Summary Judgment/Partial Summary Judgment as to 21 Plaintiff’s, A.P., claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of 22 the Rehabilitation Act, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, Article I, Section 7(A) of the 23 California Constitution, Article IX, Section 1 and 5 of the California Constitution, 24 and Negligence was heard on March 20, 2017. Surisa Rivers, Esq., appeared for 25 Plaintiff, A.P. Nancy Doumanian, Esq., appeared for Defendant. 26 After considering the moving, opposition, and reply briefs, the evidence 27 submitted by the parties and the arguments presented by the parties’ respective 28 counsel, this Court finds that: -1[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT 1 1. 2 That there are no triable issues of material fact and that Defendant is entitled to Partial Summary Judgment as a matter of law because the 3 August 13, 2015 Settlement Agreement entered into by Plaintiff and 4 the School District expressly waives and releases all the allegations, 5 claims, and causes of action raised in Plaintiff’s Complaint other than 6 the state law claims which are the Third and Sixth cause of action. 7 8 2. 9 On March 22, 2017, the Court issued a Minute Order requesting briefing on the following issue: whether the Court should exercise its 10 discretion to maintain jurisdiction over the two remaining state law 11 claims, or whether it should instead invoke 28 U.S.C. Section 12 1367(c)(3) to decline continuing supplemental jurisdiction and 13 dismiss those claims without prejudice, allowing Plaintiff to refile 14 them in state court? Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true and 15 correct copy of the Court’s Order granting this motion and the Court’s 16 request for additional briefing on Supplemental Jurisdiction. 17 18 19 20 21 3. On April 17, 2017, the Court issued a final Order declining to exercise its discretion to maintain supplemental jurisdiction and dismissing the remaining state law claims without prejudice. Attached as Exhibit “B” is a true and correct copy of the Court’s Ruling on this subject. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT 1 2 3 4 4. The Court therefor Orders that Judgment be entered against Plaintiff A.P., and in favor of Defendant Glendale Unified School District. Defendant shall be entitled to recover its costs and attorney’s fees where permitted by statute. 5 6 7 GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFOR, IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 9 10 11 DATED: April 20, 2017 __________________________________ GEORGE H. WU, U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT PROOF OF SERVICE 1 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 3 I, the undersigned, am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and not a party to the within 4 action. My business address is 2626 Foothill Boulevard, Suite 250, La Crescenta, 5 CA 91214. On April 20, 2017, I served the foregoing document, described as [PROPOSED] 6 JUDGMENT in this action by: 7 8 9 Submitting an electronic version of the document to ECF (Electronic Case Filing). and by placing the original of the document true copies of the document in separate sealed envelopes to the following addresses: 10 Surisa Rivers, Esq. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Sarah Gross, Esq. Surisa Rivers Law Office 2529 Foothill Blvd. Suite 202 La Crescenta, CA 91214 Tel: (818) 330-7012 Fax: (213) 402-6077 Email: surisa@riverslawoffice.org Email: sarah@riverslawoffice.org Attorneys for Plaintiff, A.P. by and through his guardian ad litem, C.P BY U.S. MAIL - I deposited said envelopes in the mail at Los Angeles, California. The envelopes were mailed with fully prepaid postage affixed thereon. I am readily familiar with Doumanian & Associates’ practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, documents are deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on the same day stated in this proof of service in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that, on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one (1) day after the date stated in this proof of service. 21 FEDERAL I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made. 22 Executed on April 20, 2017, at La Crescenta, California. 23 24 Janna Delgado (Type or Print Name) (Signature of Declarant) 25 26 27 28 -4[PROPOSED] JUDGMENT

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?