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