Arnold v. County of Sacramento et al
Filing
42
CONSENT DECREE and [PROPOSED] ORDER for Settlement of plaintiff's Injunctive Relief claims only as to defendant Sunrise Recreation & Park District by Connie Arnold. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment A, # 2 Proposed Order) (Lim, Mary) Modified on 7/2/2013 (Mena-Sanchez, L).
1
2
3
4
5
6
JEFF A. HARRISON (SBN 151227)
JHarrison@metzharrison.com
MARY J. LIM (SBN 272170)
MLim@metzharrison.com
METZ & HARRISON, LLP
139 Richmond Street
El Segundo, California 90245
Tel: (310) 648-8755
Fax: (310) 648-8734
7
Attorneys for Plaintiff, CONNIE ARNOLD
8
(Appearances continued on next page.)
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
CONNIE ARNOLD
13
Plaintiff,
14
15
vs.
16
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO;
SACRAMENTO PUBLIC LIBRARY
AUTHORITY; SUNRISE
RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT;
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Defendants.
) Case No.: 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
)
Civil Rights
)
)
)
) CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER
) FOR SETTLEMENT OF
) PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
) CLAIMS ONLY AS TO DEFENDANT
) SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK
) DISTRICT
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
25
26
27
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
MARK F. HAZELWOOD (SBN 136521)
mhazelwood@lowball.com
DIRK D. LARSEN (SBN 246028)
dlarsen@lowball.com
LOW, BALL & LYNCH
505 Montgomery Street, 7th Floor
San Francisco, California 94111
Tel: (415) 981-6630
Fax: (415) 982-1634
7
8
Attorneys for Defendant SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
2
1
2
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER
1.
Plaintiff CONNIE ARNOLD (“Plaintiff”) filed a First Amended
3
Complaint (“Complaint”) in this action on August 27, 2012 to enforce provisions of
4
the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.;
5
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Section 504”), 29 U.S.C. § 794; Cal.
6
Civ. Code § 54 et seq.; and Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 4450 et seq. and 11135 et seq.,
7
against Defendants COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO (“COUNTY”); SACRAMENTO
8
PUBLIC LIBRARY AUTHORITY (“SPLA”); and SUNRISE RECREATION &
9
PARK DISTRICT (“SRPD”) (collectively, “Defendants”). This Consent Decree and
10
Order relates to resolution of Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief only against
11
Defendant SRPD only.
12
2.
Plaintiff has alleged that Defendant SRPD violated Title II of the ADA,
13
Section 504, and California civil rights laws and statutes by failing to provide full and
14
equal access to its programs, services, and activities offered at Crosswoods Park
15
(“Park”), which is located at 6742 Auburn Boulevard, Citrus Heights, California
16
95621. Defendant SRPD and Plaintiff (collectively, “Parties” hereafter) now seek to
17
settle all of Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief as to the barriers at the Park and
18
agree that the terms of this Consent Decree and Order will satisfy all of Plaintiff’s
19
claims for injunctive relief only against Defendant SRPD as set forth in her
20
Complaint in this matter.
21
3.
Defendant SRPD answered the allegations of the Complaint with a
22
number of denials and affirmative defenses, and have not waived and do not waive
23
the same by entering into this Consent Decree. As such, nothing stated within this
24
Consent Decree nor the fact of this consent decree shall be construed as an admission
25
of any of the claims or of Plaintiff’s allegations in her Complaint. Defendant SRPD
26
maintains its denial of the allegations in the Complaint filed by Plaintiff and does not
27
admit liability or responsibility as the Parties hereby enter into this Consent Decree
28
for the purpose of entering into an early settlement of all of Plaintiff’s claims for
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
3
1
injunctive relief as to SRPD as set forth in her Complaint without the need for
2
protracted litigation.
3
JURISDICTION
4
4.
The Parties to this Consent Decree agree that the Court has jurisdiction
5
of this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 for alleged violations of the Americans
6
with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. and Section 504 of the
7
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794, and pursuant to supplemental
8
jurisdiction under § 1367(a) for alleged violations of California civil rights laws and
9
regulations that have been pled in the Complaint.
10
5.
The Parties to this Consent Decree agree to entry of this Order to resolve
11
all of Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief as to SRPD raised in the Complaint filed
12
with the Court in this matter. Accordingly, the Parties stipulate to the entry of this
13
Order without trial or adjudication of any issues and as full resolution of Plaintiff’s
14
claims for injunctive relief only as to SRPD with respect to the condition of the
15
subject property prior to completion of its modification pursuant to this Consent
16
Decree.
17
WHEREFORE, the Parties to this Consent Decree hereby agree and stipulate to
18
the Court’s entry of this Consent Decree and Order, which provides as follows:
19
SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AS
20
TO DEFENDANT SRPD ONLY:
21
6.
The Parties have reached an agreement regarding Plaintiff’s claims for
22
injunctive relief as to SRPD. Attached as Attachment A are all of the terms of the
23
settlement for injunctive relief as agreed to between the Parties. Said Attachment is
24
hereby incorporated by reference as if fully set forth as the full and complete
25
agreement between the Parties for settlement of all of Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive
26
relief as to SRPD as requested in Plaintiff’s Complaint. All recommendations
27
indicated on Attachment A are to be completed in accordance with the following
28
provisions:
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
4
1
a. Within six (6) months of Defendant SRPD’s signing of the Consent
2
Decree, SRPD agrees to make the modifications to Item Nos. 1.014 –
3
1.021; 1.023; 2.001 – 2.023; and 4.003 – 4.010.
4
b. Within nine (9) months of Defendant SRPD’s signing of the Consent
5
Decree, SRPD agrees to make the modifications to Item Nos. 1.001 –
6
1.010 and 3.001.
7
c. Within twenty-four (24) months of Defendant SRPD’s signing of the
8
Consent Decree, SRPD agrees to make the modifications to Item Nos.
9
1.011 – 1.013; 1.022; and 1.028 – 1.032.
10
7.
Upon completion of the items in Attachment A, Defendant SRPD shall
11
advise Plaintiff in writing that all items have been completed. Plaintiff shall then
12
have the right to complete an inspection of the subject property by Plaintiff’s
13
representative and at Plaintiff’s own expense within forty-five (45) days of being
14
provided notice of completion by Defendant SRPD. In the event that Plaintiff
15
believes that Defendant SRPD has not complied with the terms of this Consent
16
Decree and Order, Plaintiff’s counsel will inform Defendant SRPD’s counsel of the
17
alleged breach, and allow for thirty (30) days to negotiate a resolution. A motion to
18
compel enforcement may be filed in the event that the Parties are unable to resolve
19
the alleged breach of the terms of the Consent Decree and Order. Plaintiff will be
20
entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees if Plaintiff is forced to file a motion to enforce
21
the terms of the Consent Decree.
22
8.
Plaintiff and Defendant SRPD have not reached an agreement to settle
23
Plaintiff’s claims for monetary relief, including attorneys’ fees, and litigation
24
expenses and costs, which the Parties agree will be resolved by way of negotiated
25
settlement, motion, or trial.
26
ENTIRE CONSENT ORDER:
27
28
9.
This Consent Decree and Order constitutes the entire agreement between
the signing parties on the matter of Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief against
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
5
1
SRPD, and no other statement, promise, or agreement, either written or oral, made by
2
any of the parties or agents of any of the parties, that is not contained in this written
3
Consent Decree, shall be enforceable regarding Plaintiff’s claims for injunctive relief
4
against SRPD.
5
CONSENT ORDER BINDING ON PARTIES AND SUCCESSORS IN
6
INTEREST:
7
10.
This Consent Decree and Order shall be binding on Plaintiff CONNIE
8
ARNOLD and Defendant SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT and any
9
successors in interest. The Parties have a duty to so notify all such successors in
10
interest of the existence and terms of this Consent Decree and Order during the period
11
of the Court’s jurisdiction of this Consent Decree and Order.
12
MUTUAL RELEASE AND WAIVER BETWEEN PLAINTIFF AND
13
DEFENDANT SRPD OF CIVIL CODE § 1542 AS TO PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS
14
FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ONLY:
15
11.
Except for all obligations required in this Consent Decree and any fees
16
and costs incurred by filing a motion to enforce this Consent Decree, Plaintiff, on
17
behalf of herself, her respective agents, attorneys, representatives, predecessors,
18
successors, heirs, partners and assigns, releases and forever discharges Defendant
19
SRPD and all its franchisors, franchisees, partners, managers, employees, joint
20
ventures, successors, heirs, assigns, directors, shareholders, subsidiaries,
21
stockholders, parent companies, officers, board members, employees, agents,
22
attorneys, insurers insurance carriers, predecessors, and representatives of each other
23
Party, from all claims and causes of action of whatever kind or nature, presently
24
known or unknown, arising out of or in any way connected with Plaintiff’s claims for
25
injunctive relief against Defendant SRPD in the lawsuit and the incidents alleged
26
therein with respect to injunctive relief only for the physical condition of the subject
27
property prior to completion of its modification pursuant to this Consent Decree
28
including its accessibility, whether or not addressed in the lawsuit.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
6
1
12.
Except for all obligations required in this Consent Decree, and any fees
2
and costs incurred by filing a motion to enforce this Consent Decree, Defendant
3
SRPD and its franchisors, franchisees, partners, managers, employees, joint ventures,
4
successors, heirs, assigns, directors, shareholders, subsidiaries, stockholders, parent
5
companies, officers, board members, employees, agents, attorneys, insurers insurance
6
carriers, predecessors, and representatives, releases and forever discharges Plaintiff
7
and her respective agents, attorneys, representatives, predecessors, successors, heirs,
8
partners and assigns, from all claims and causes of action of whatever kind or nature,
9
presently known or unknown, arising out of or in any way connected with Plaintiff’s
10
claims for injunctive relief against Defendant SRPD in the lawsuit, the incidents
11
alleged therein, with respect to injunctive relief only for the physical condition of the
12
property prior to completion of its modification pursuant to this Consent Decree
13
including its accessibility, whether or not addressed in the lawsuit.
14
13.
The Parties understand and agree that there is a risk and possibility that,
15
subsequent to the execution of this Consent Decree, any or all of them will incur,
16
suffer, or experience some further loss or damage with respect to the lawsuit which
17
are unknown or unanticipated at the time this Consent Decree is signed. Except for
18
all obligations required in this Consent Decree between Plaintiff and Defendant
19
SRPD and all obligations between or amongst the Defendants, the Parties intend that
20
this Consent Decree apply to all conditions that existed at the subject facilities.
21
Therefore, except for all such obligations required in this Consent Decree between
22
Plaintiff and Defendant SRPD and all obligations between or amongst the
23
Defendants, this Consent Decree shall apply to and cover any and all claims,
24
demands, actions and causes of action by the Parties to this Consent Decree with
25
respect to the injunctive relief issues in the lawsuit against Defendant SRPD and the
26
current condition of the Park and any or all improvements thereon, whether the same
27
are known, unknown or hereafter discovered or ascertained, and the provisions of §
28
1542 of the California Civil Code are hereby expressly waived. Section 1542
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
provides as follows:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO
CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW
OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT
THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF
KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY
AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE
DEBTOR.
7
8
9
TERM OF THE CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER:
14.
This Consent Decree shall be in full force and effect as described herein
10
and in Attachment A. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for the purpose of
11
enforcing provisions of this Consent Decree until the terms of this Consent Decree
12
and Order are satisfactorily completed.
13
SEVERABILITY:
14
15.
If any term of this Consent Decree and Order is determined by any court
15
to be unenforceable, the other terms of this Consent Decree and Order shall
16
nonetheless remain in full force and effect.
17
SIGNATORIES BIND PARTIES:
18
16.
Signatories on the behalf of the Parties represent that they are authorized
19
to bind the Parties to this Consent Decree. This Consent Decree may be signed in
20
counterparts and a facsimile signature shall have the same force and effect as an
21
original signature.
22
23
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CONTENT:
24
25
Dated: June 28, 2013
By:
/s/- Connie Arnold*
Plaintiff CONNIE ARNOLD
26
27
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
8
1
///
Defendant SUNRISE RECREATION &
PARK DISTRICT
2
3
4
Dated: June 18, 2013
5
By:
/s/- Dave Mitchell**
Its:
Dave Mitchell, District Administrator
6
7
8
APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY:
9
10
Dated: July 01, 2013
METZ & HARRISON, LLP
11
12
By:
13
14
15
/s/- Mary J. Lim
JEFF A. HARRISON
MARY J. LIM
Attorneys for Plaintiff, CONNIE ARNOLD
16
17
Dated: June 24, 2013
LOW, BALL & LYNCH
18
19
By:
20
21
22
/s/-Mark F. Hazelwood (as authorized on 6.24.13)
MARK F. HAZELWOOD
DIRK D. LARSEN
Attorneys for Defendant SUNRISE
RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
23
24
25
*
**
Original signature retained by Metz & Harrison, LLP
Original signature retained by Low, Ball & Lynch
26
27
28
________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONSENT DECREE AND ORDER FOR SETTLEMENT OF PLAINTIFF’S INJUNCTIVE RELIEF CLAIMS ONLY
AS TO DEFENDANT SUNRISE RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT
Case No. 2:12-CV-01998-LKK-EFB
9
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?