National Federation of the Blind et al v. Target Corporation

Filing 92

Proposed Order re 90 MOTION for Summary Judgment Target Corporation's Notice of Motion and Motion for Summary Judgment; Supporting Memorandum of Points and Authorities [Proposed] Order Granting Target Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment by Target Corporation. (Kreeger, Matthew) (Filed on 3/8/2007)

Download PDF
National Federation of the Blind et al v. Target Corporation Doc. 92 Case 3:06-cv-01802-MHP Document 92 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 HAROLD J. McELHINNY (CA SBN 66781) MATTHEW I. KREEGER (CA SBN 153793) KRISTINA PASZEK (CA SBN 226351) HMcElhinny@mofo.com MKreeger@mofo.com KPaszek@mofo.com MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, California 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-7000 Facsimile: (415) 268-7522 Attorneys for Defendant TARGET CORPORATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND, the NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF CALIFORNIA, on behalf of their members, and Bruce F. Sexton, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. TARGET CORPORATION, Defendant. Case No. C 06-01802 MHP [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING TARGET CORPORATION'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Date: April 16, 2007 Time: 2:00 PM Judge: Hon. Marilyn Hall Patel [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING TARGET'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. C 06-01802 MHP sf-2279096 Dockets.Justia.com Case 3:06-cv-01802-MHP Document 92 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 2 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This matter comes before the Court on Defendant Target Corporation's ("Target") Motion for Summary Judgment ("Motion"), which was properly noticed for hearing on April 16, 2006. The Court has reviewed the briefs and declarations, and their exhibits, the arguments of the parties, and the record in this case, and now grants Target's Motion for the following reasons. A "place of public accommodation," within the meaning of Title III, is an "actual, physical place[]." See Weyer v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 198 F.3d 1104, 1114 (9th Cir. 2000). While unequal access to a "service" of a place of public accommodation may constitute a violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, a plaintiff must allege that there is a connection between the challenged service and the place of public accommodation. In its September 6, 2006 Order granting in part Target's motion to dismiss, this Court concluded as follows: [T]o the extent that plaintiffs allege that the inaccessibility of Target.com impedes the full and equal enjoyment of goods and services offered in Target stores, the plaintiffs state a claim, and the motion to dismiss is denied. To the extent that Target.com offers information and services unconnected to Target stores, which do not affect the enjoyment of goods and services offered in Target stores, the plaintiffs fail to state a claim under Title III of the ADA. Defendant's motion to dismiss this portion of plaintiffs' ADA claim is granted. Plaintiffs have provided no evidence creating a genuine issue of material fact with respect to whether Bruce F. Sexton has suffered a legally cognizable injury under the ADA. Mr. Sexton complains only of difficulties in using Target.com; he does not claim that those difficulties somehow impeded his access to or enjoyment of goods or services at Target retail stores. Accordingly, Plaintiff Sexton's ADA claim cannot survive. Plaintiffs' Unruh Act and Disabled Persons Act claims are dependent on Plaintiffs' ADA claim. Accordingly, Plaintiff Sexton's state law claims, too, must fail. /// /// /// /// /// [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING TARGET'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. C 06-01802 MHP sf-1766234 1 Case 3:06-cv-01802-MHP Document 92 Filed 03/08/2007 Page 3 of 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 For the reasons stated above, the Court hereby GRANTS Target's Motion for Summary Judgment against Plaintiff Bruce F. Sexton in its entirety. Dated: ______________, 2007 Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel United States District Judge [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING TARGET'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. C 06-01802 MHP sf-1766234 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?