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)
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?