Schroeder v. Woo et al

Filing 22

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 7/2/2015 DENYING 17 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. (Reader, L)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 BILL SCHROEDER, 10 Plaintiff, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 No. 2:13-CV-01964-GEB-CKD v. WILLARD G. WOO, in his individual and representative capacity as trustee of the Woo WGECM 1998 Trust; GRACIE C. WOO, in her individual and representative capacity as trustee of the Woo WGECM 1998 Trust; SANI-FOOD MARKET INCORPORATED, a California Corporation, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants. 18 19 20 Plaintiff seeks summary judgment on his claims against 21 Defendants under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and 22 the Unruh Act, arguing that he is entitled to summary judgment 23 since 24 Market (“the Market”) are more than 36 inches from the floor and 25 less than 36 inches in length. However, Defendants state that the 26 deli 27 Plaintiff 28 solution for the inaccessible counter;” therefore, his motion the deli counter counter has replies been he and check-out modified “will since accept” 1 counters at Plaintiff’s this Sani Foods visit modification and “as a 1 concerning the deli counter is denied. (Reply 3:2-4, ECF No. 20.) 2 Further, Plaintiff asserts it is uncontroverted that after his 3 visit to the Market, “Defendants attempted to fix one of the 4 [check-out] counters . . . by bolting [on] a small auxiliary 5 counter.” (Defs.’ Resp. & Obj. Pl.’s USF (“Pl. SUF”) ¶ 14, ECF 6 No. 19.) Plaintiff argues, and relies on a photo of the modified 7 check-out counter in support of his argument, that the “auxiliary 8 counter . . . [is an inadequate remedy since it] is quite small; 9 clearly falling short of the required 36 inches in length.” 10 (Pl.’s Not. & Mot. Summ. J. 7:26-8:3, ECF No. 17; see also Potter 11 Decl. Ex. 11, ECF No. 17-13 (photo of the modified auxiliary 12 check-out counter).) However, the photograph Plaintiff presents 13 does not contain a measurement of the check-out counter’s length, 14 and therefore is insufficient to “show[] that there is no genuine 15 dispute” as to the counter’s compliance with the ADA and Unruh 16 Act. 17 judgment motion on the Market’s check-out counters is denied. Fed. 18 R. Civ. P. 56(a). Therefore, Plaintiff’s summary For the stated reasons, Plaintiff’s summary judgment 19 motion is DENIED. 20 Dated: July 2, 2015 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?