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)

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: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]

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