Arnold v. County of Sacramento et al

Filing 14

ANSWER to 7 Amended Complaint with Jury Demand by Sacramento Public Library Authority. Attorney Goulding, Lindsay Alida added.(Goulding, Lindsay)

1
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

2
3
4

Lindsay A. Goulding, SBN 227195
Kevin M. Kreutz, SBN 264654
350 University Ave., Suite 200
Sacramento, California 95825
TEL: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

5
6

Attorneys for Defendant
SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY AUTHORITY

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

CONNIE ARNOLD

11

Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB

Plaintiff,
v.

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT; DEMAND
FOR JURY TRIAL

COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO;
SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY
AUTHORITY; SUNRISE RECREATION &
PARK DISTRICT; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive,

Complaint Filed:
First Amended:

12
13
14

July 31, 2012
August 27, 2012

15
Defendants.
16

/

17
18

Defendant SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY AUTHORITY (“LIBRARY”) answers the
amended complaint on file in this action as follows:

19

Defendant LIBRARY reserves the right to raise additional affirmative defenses and/or submit

20

such at trial, which are subsequently discovered through the discovery process. Defendant

21

LIBRARY denies any allegations of the Complaint not specifically admitted herein.

22

I.

23

INTRODUCTION

24

1.

Answering paragraph 1, Defendant LIBRARY admits the Americans With

25

Disabilities Act (“ADA”) was enacted in 1990. Answering the remaining allegations contained in

26

paragraph 1, Defendant LIBRARY contends the remaining allegations do not constitute averments

27

of fact to which an answer may be required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, this

28

///

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

1
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

answering Defendant generally and specifically denies each and every remaining allegation contained

2

in said paragraph.

3

2.

Answering paragraph 2, Defendant LIBRARY admits Title II of the ADA applies to

4

public facilities. Defendant lacks information and knowledge sufficient to answer the allegation that

5

Title II of the ADA applies, without qualification or definition, to “Sylvan Oaks Public Library” or

6

“Crosswoods Park”, and basing its denial on this ground, denies. Defendant LIBRARY generally

7

and specifically denies each and every remaining allegation contained in paragraph 2.

8
9

3.

Answering paragraph 3, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies each

and every allegation contained in paragraph 3, and on that basis, denies paragraph 3 in its entirety.

10
11

II.

12

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

13

4.

Answering paragraphs 4 and 5, Defendant LIBRARY contends that said paragraphs

14

contain conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an answer may be required, but

15

insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically

16

denies each and every allegation contained in said paragraphs.

17

III.

18

PARTIES

19

5.

Answering paragraphs 6 and 7, Defendant LIBRARY lacks information and

20

knowledge sufficient to answer the allegations in paragraphs 6 and 7, and basing its denial on this

21

ground, denies each and every allegation thereof.

22

6.

Answering paragraph 8, Defendant LIBRARY admits that the County of Sacramento

23

and the cities of Citrus Heights, Elk Grove and Sacramento are member entities of the LIBRARY.

24

Defendant LIBRARY further admits the LIBRARY website states “[t]he purpose of the Sacramento

25

Public Library Authority is to provide public library services that provide open access to diverse

26

resources and ideas that inspire learning, promote reading and enhance community life to all citizens

27

in our member jurisdictions.” Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies each and every

28

remaining allegation contained in paragraph 8.

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

2
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

7.

Answering paragraph 9, Defendant LIBRARY admits it is a Joint Powers Authority

2

with the power to exercise jointly the common powers of its member entities, and that its member

3

entities have the power to study, plan for, develop, finance, acquire, construct, maintain, repair,

4

manage, operate and control public library facilities.

5

specifically denies each and every remaining allegation contained in paragraph 9.

6

8.

Defendant LIBRARY generally and

Answering paragraph 10, Defendant LIBRARY lacks information and knowledge

7

sufficient to answer the allegations in paragraph 10, and basing its denial on this ground, denies each

8

and every allegation thereof.

9

9.

Answering paragraph 11, Defendant LIBRARY admits it is a Joint Powers Authority

10

with the power to exercise jointly the common powers of its member entities, and that its member

11

entities have the power to study, plan for, develop, finance, acquire, construct, maintain, repair,

12

manage, operate and control public library facilities.

13

specifically denies each and every remaining allegation contained in paragraph 11.

14

10.

Defendant LIBRARY generally and

Answering paragraph 12, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies each

15

and every allegation contained in paragraph 12, and on that basis, denies paragraph 12 in its entirety.

16

IV.

17

GOVERNMENT CLAIM

18

11.

Answering paragraphs 13, 14 and 15, Defendant LIBRARY contends that said

19

paragraphs do not constitute averments of fact to which an answer may be required, but insofar as

20

an answer may be deemed required, this answering Defendant generally and specifically denies each

21

and every allegation contained in said paragraphs. Additionally, Defendant LIBRARY lacks

22

information and knowledge sufficient to answer the allegations in paragraphs 13, 14 and 15, and

23

basing its denial on this additional ground, denies each and every allegation thereof.

24

V.

25

FACTS UPON WHICH ALL CLAIMS ARE BASED

26

12.

Answering paragraphs 16, 17 and 18, Defendant LIBRARY contends that said

27

paragraphs do not constitute averments of fact to which an answer may be required, but insofar as

28

an answer may be deemed required, this answering Defendant generally and specifically denies each

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

3
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

and every allegation contained in said paragraphs. Additionally, Defendant LIBRARY lacks

2

information and knowledge sufficient to answer the allegations in paragraphs 16, 17 and 18, and

3

basing its denial on this additional ground, denies each and every allegation thereof. Additionally,

4

Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies the allegation contained in paragraph 18 that

5

“designated accessible parking spaces in the parking lot do not provide the required access and do

6

not comply with minimum accessibility standards for accessible parking spaces.”

7
8

13.

Answering paragraph 19, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies each

and every allegation contained in paragraph 19, and on that basis, denies paragraph 19 in its entirety.

9

14.

Answering paragraph 20, Defendant LIBRARY lacks information and knowledge

10

sufficient to answer the allegations in paragraph 20 that “Plaintiff found that it was difficult to park

11

her van in the parking lot and use her wheelchair to reach the Park areas and Library’s entrances”,

12

and basing its denial on this ground, generally and specifically denies said allegations. Additionally,

13

Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies the allegation that such difficulty was “due

14

to a lack of safe pedestrian paths of travel.” Defendant LIBRARY also generally and specifically

15

denies the allegation contained in paragraph 20 that “[t]hese barriers place Plaintiff and similarly

16

disabled persons at risk of physical injury, require [sic] her to navigate her wheelchair in parking

17

areas around and behind vehicles.” Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies each and

18

every remaining allegation contained in paragraph 20.

19

15.

Answering paragraphs 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26, Defendant LIBRARY generally and

20

specifically denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26, and

21

on that basis, denies paragraphs 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 in their entirety.

22

16.

Answering paragraph 27, Defendant LIBRARY lacks information and knowledge

23

sufficient to answer the allegations in paragraph 27, and basing its denial on this ground, denies each

24

and every allegation thereof.

25

17.

Answering paragraphs 28, 29 and 30, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically

26

denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 28, 29 and 30, and on that basis, denies

27

paragraphs 28, 29 and 30 in their entirety.

28

///

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

4
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

VI.

2

NOTICE

3

18.

Answering paragraph 31, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically denies each

4

and every allegation contained in Paragraph 31, and on that basis, denies Paragraph 31 in its entirety.

5

VII.

6

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

7

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT)

8

19.

9

Answering paragraph 32, this answering Defendant incorporates by reference its

responses to paragraphs 1 through 31 above, as though fully restated herein.

10

20.

Answering paragraphs 33 and 34, Defendant LIBRARY contends said paragraphs

11

contain conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an answer may be required, but

12

insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically

13

denies each and every allegation contained in said paragraphs.

14

21.

Answering paragraphs 35, 36 and 37, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically

15

denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 35, 36 and 37, and on that basis, denies

16

paragraphs 35, 36 and 37 in their entirety.

17

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (REHAB ACT)

18
19

22.

Answering paragraph 38, this answering Defendant incorporates by reference its

responses to paragraphs 1 through 37 above, as though fully restated herein.

20

23.

Answering paragraph 39, Defendant LIBRARY contends that said paragraph does

21

not constitute averments of fact to which an answer may be required, but insofar as an answer may

22

be deemed required, this answering Defendant generally and specifically denies each and every

23

allegation contained in said paragraph.

24

24.

Answering paragraphs 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44, Defendant LIBRARY generally and

25

specifically denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraphs 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44, and on

26

that basis, denies Paragraphs 40, 41, 42, 43, and 44 in their entirety.

27

///

28

///

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

5
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (STATE LAW CLAIM, CAL GOV CODE 11135 & 4450)

2
3

25.

Answering paragraph 45, this answering Defendant incorporates by reference its

responses to paragraphs 1 through 44 above, as though fully restated herein.

4

26.

Answering paragraphs 46, 47, 48 and 49, Defendant LIBRARY generally and

5

specifically denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 46, 47, 48 and 49, and on that

6

basis, denies paragraphs 46, 47, 48 and 49 in their entirety.

7

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (CALIFORNIA DISABLED PERSONS ACT)

8
9

27.

Answering paragraph 50, this answering Defendant incorporates by reference its

responses to paragraphs 1 through 49 above, as though fully restated herein.

10

28.

Answering paragraph 51, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically

11

denies each and every allegation contained in paragraph 51, and on that basis, denies

12

paragraph 51 in its entirety.

13

29.

Answering paragraphs 52 and 53, Defendant LIBRARY contends that said

14

paragraphs contain conclusions of law and not averments of fact to which an answer may be

15

required, but insofar as an answer may be deemed required, Defendant LIBRARY generally and

16

specifically denies each and every allegation contained in said paragraphs.

17

30.

Answering paragraphs 54 and 55, Defendant LIBRARY generally and specifically

18

denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 54 and 55, and on that basis, denies

19

paragraphs 54 and 55 in their entirety.

20

VIII.

21

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

22

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

23
24

This answering Defendant alleges Plaintiff fails to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted.

25

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

26

This answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff’s Complaint does not present a case or

27

controversy.

28

///

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

6
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2

This answering Defendant alleges all actions taken were undertaken in good faith and with

3

reasonable belief that said actions were valid, necessary and constitutionally proper, thus the

4

answering Defendant is entitled to qualified immunity.

5

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

6

This answering Defendant alleges that this claim is barred by the privileges, immunities and

7

limitations set forth in Government Code §800, et seq., Government Code §900, et seq. and C.C.P.

8

§338, et seq.

9

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

10
11

This answering Defendant alleges that Defendant’s acts were privileged under applicable
statutes and case law.

12

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

13
14

This answering Defendant alleges that state law claims are subject to a 90-day stay of
proceedings under California Civil Code §§ 55.51-55.54.

15

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

16

This answering Defendant alleges Plaintiff knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care, should

17

have known of the risks, hazards, illnesses and injuries involved in the undertaking in which Plaintiff

18

was engaged, but nevertheless and with full knowledge of these things did fully and voluntarily

19

consent to assume the risks, hazards, illnesses and injuries involved in the undertaking.

20

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

21

This answering Defendant alleges Plaintiff failed to exercise ordinary care for her own safety

22

and well-being, and that failure to exercise ordinary care proximately caused and/or contributed to

23

the alleged illness and injury plead in the Complaint; consequently, Defendant is entitled to the full

24

protection of the law.

25

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

26

This answering Defendant alleges Plaintiff faces no threat of future irreparable harm;

27

therefore, injunctive relief is not available.

28

///

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

7
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2
3

This answering Defendant alleges that this claim is barred by the equitable doctrines of
estoppel, waiver, unclean hands, and laches.

4

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

5

This answering Defendant alleges that if Plaintiff sustained the damages alleged in the

6

Complaint, which Defendant denies, Plaintiff’s damages were caused in whole or in part by the

7

conduct of third parties for whom Defendant is not responsible, by forces over which Defendant has

8

no control or through acts or omissions on the part of Plaintiff, and therefore, an act or omission on

9

the part of Defendant was not the proximate cause and/or legal cause of the Plaintiff’s alleged

10

damages.

11

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

12

This answering Defendant alleges that the injuries and damages Plaintiff complains of, if any,

13

resulted from the acts and or omissions of others, and without any fault on the part of this answering

14

Defendant.

15

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

16
17

This answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint is barred in that the relief sought would
place an undue financial and administrative burden on this answering Defendant.

18

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

19
20

This answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint is barred in that the relief sought would
require unreasonable modifications to programs and services.

21

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

22
23

This answering Defendant alleges that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative and other
state remedies.

24

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

25

This answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint is barred because Defendant is not

26

required to make structural changes in existing facilities where other methods are or would be

27

effective to achieve compliance with applicable law.

28

///

PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

8
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2

This answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint is barred in that the relief sought would

3

inappropriately mandate the manner in which Defendant allocates public funds in relation to existing

4

programs and services.

5
6
7

EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
This answering Defendant alleges that the Complaint is barred because Plaintiff failed to
request either reasonable accommodation or auxiliary aids as required by law.

8

IX.

9

PRAYER

10

WHEREFORE, Defendant LIBRARY prays for judgment as follows:

11

1.

Plaintiff’s action be dismissed;

12

2.

Plaintiff’s claim for injunctive relief be denied;

13

2.

Plaintiff take nothing by way of the Complaint;

14

3.

Defendant be awarded its costs of suit, including attorney fees; and,

15

4.

For such other relief as the Court deems proper.

16
17

Dated: September 26, 2012

18

Respectfully submitted,
PORTER SCOTT
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

19
20

By

21
22

/s/ Lindsay A. Goulding
Lindsay A. Goulding
Kevin M. Kreutz
Attorneys for Defendant SACRAMENTO
PUBLIC LIBRARY AUTHORITY

23
24
25
26
27
28
PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

9
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL

1

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

2

Defendant LIBRARY hereby demands a trial by jury in the above-entitled action as provided

3

by the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution and Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of

4

Civil Procedure.

5

Dated: September 26, 2012

6

Respectfully submitted,
PORTER SCOTT
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

7
8

By

9
10

/s/ Lindsay A. Goulding
Lindsay A. Goulding
Kevin M. Kreutz
Attorneys for Defendant SACRAMENTO
PUBLIC LIBRARY AUTHORITY

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PORTER * SCOTT
ATTORNEYS
3 5 0 U N I V E R S I T Y A V E ., S U I T E 2 0 0
SAC RAM EN T O , C A 95825
T E L : 9 1 6 . 9 2 9 .1 4 8 1
F A X : 9 1 6 . 9 2 7 .3 7 0 6

www.porterscott.com

01060202.WPD

10
ANSW ER TO COM PLAINT;
DEM AND FOR JURY TRIAL