Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports US, et al

Filing 213

JUDGMENT and PERMANENT INJUNCTION signed by Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on 7/20/12. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6

Lynn Hubbard III, SBN 69773
Scottlynn J Hubbard IV, SBN 212970
Law Offices of Lynn Hubbard
12 Williamsburg Lane
Chico, Ca. 95926
[phone]
Attorney for Plaintiff

7
8
9

United States District Court

10

Eastern District Of California

11
12
13
14

Byron Chapman,
Plaintiff,

15
16
17

Vs.
Pier 1 Imports (U.S.), Inc.,

18
19

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:04-cv-1339 LKK CMK
Judgment of Permanent
Injunction
[Fed. R. Civ. P. 65]

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Chapman v. Pier 1 Inc., et al., Case No. CIV. S-04-1339 LKK DAD
(Proposed) Judgment of Permanent Injunction

-1-

1

Judgment of Permanent Injunction

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

This cause came on to be heard on defendant’s motion for summary
judgment and plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment, the
declarations submitted in support of and in opposition to the cross-motions,
and oral argument in open court. To ensure that persons with disabilities
have the “full and equal enjoyment” of defendant’s Vacaville store as stated
in the court’s June 27, 2012 order denying defendant’s motion and granting
plaintiff’s cross-motion (Dkt. No. 210), 1 and having considered defendant’s
objections to plaintiff’s proposed permanent injunction (Dkt. Nos. 211 &
212), the court hereby permanently enjoins Defendant from violating Title III
of the Americans with Disabilities Act and, California’s Unruh Civil Rights
Act and Disabled Persons Act, as follows:

13

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that:

14
15
16

Pier 1, its officers, agents, representative, employees and all persons in
active concert and participation with them, are PERMANENTLY
ENJOINED from:

17
18
19
20
21

1.

Blocking the aisles of its Vacaville store with

merchandise or other obstacles, such that the clear path through the aisles is
narrower than 36 inches wide (or permitting such blockages), except for the
unavoidable transitory blockages caused by re-stocking or similar activities;
and

22
23
24
25

1

See also Baughman v. Walt Disney World Company, ___ F.3d ___,

26

Slip Op. at 7-9 (9th Cir. July 28, 2012) (confirming that the ADA means

27

what it says when it prohibits facilities from denying persons with disabilities

28

the “full and equal enjoyment” of their facilities).
Chapman v. Pier 1 Inc., et al., Case No. CIV. S-04-1339 LKK DAD
(Proposed) Judgment of Permanent Injunction

-2-

1
2
3
4
5

2.

Cluttering the accessible check-out counter at its

Vacaville store with merchandise or other material that impede the ability of
its disabled customers to use that counter (or permitting such cluttering),
except for the unavoidable transitory clutter resulting from the current use of
that counter to check-out merchandise.

6
7

IT IS SO ORDERED.

8

DATED: July 20, 2012.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Chapman v. Pier 1 Inc., et al., Case No. CIV. S-04-1339 LKK DAD
(Proposed) Judgment of Permanent Injunction

-3-