Charles N Belssner v. The State of Nevada

Filing 32

ORDER granting 22 Motion to Dismiss. Amended Complaint deadline: 8/14/2017. Signed by Judge Andrew P. Gordon on 7/12/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JM)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3

***

4

CHARLES N. BELSSNER,

5
6
7

Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF NEVADA,

8

Case No. 2:15-cv-00672-APG-PAL
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO
DISMISS
(ECF No. 22)

Defendant.

9
10

Plaintiff Charles Belssner filed this lawsuit against defendant State of Nevada. Belssner

11

claims the State denied him reasonable accommodations for his hearing and speech impairments

12

during various landlord/tenant lawsuits in state court, in violation of Title II of the Americans

13

with Disabilities Act (ADA). The State now moves to dismiss, arguing most of Belssner’s Title

14

II claim is time-barred, the timely allegations do not state a claim, and Belssner did not timely

15

serve the State. I grant the motion to dismiss because most of Belssner’s allegations are untimely

16

and his timely allegations fail to allege a plausible Title II claim.1

17

I. BACKGROUND

18

Plaintiff Charles Belssner originally filed this action on March 24, 2015 in the Central

19

District of California. ECF No. 1. The case was transferred to this court about a month later. ECF

20

No. 6. Belssner’s complaint was screened, and his claims against the Regional Justice Center

21

were dismissed because that is a building and not an entity capable of being sued. ECF No. 14 at

22

4-5. Belssner’s claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 were also dismissed because the State is not a

23
24
25
26
27
28

1

The State also argues Belssner failed to timely serve the complaint. I do not dismiss on
this basis because Belssner served the complaint within the time granted by Magistrate Judge
Leen. On April 16, 2016, Magistrate Judge Leen ordered that Belssner complete service on or
before July 19, 2016. ECF No. 16. After Belssner experienced some difficulties effecting service,
Judge Leen extended the time to complete service to October 14, 2016. ECF No. 19. Service was
made on the State of Nevada Office of the Attorney General on October 7, 2016. ECF No. 20.
Consequently, Belssner served the State within the time granted by the court.

1

person for purposes of § 1983. Id. at 5. However, Belssner’s claim under Title II of the ADA was

2

not dismissed because he adequately alleged (1) he was a person with a disability due to his

3

speech and hearing impairments; (2) he was denied a public benefit because he was denied access

4

to the courts; (3) he was denied access to the court because his requests for certain

5

accommodations were denied; and (4) this denial of a benefit was by reason of his disabilities. Id.

6

at 6-7. Belssner’s Title II claim rests on allegations that he has been a party to numerous

7

landlord/tenant lawsuits in Nevada state court during which he was denied requested

8

accommodations (such as a laptop to communicate with his court reader, an easel, and for the

9

reader to read his opening statement) or where documents were not sent to him.

10

The State moves to dismiss, arguing that almost all of Belssner’s Title II claim is untimely

11

because the underlying state court actions were resolved more than a year before Belssner filed

12

this lawsuit. For those aspects of the claim that are timely, the State argues Belssner has not

13

alleged facts showing he was harmed or that he was denied reasonable accommodations, and the

14

judicially noticeable records of the state court actions show he either prevailed, was given

15

accommodations, or lost for reasons unrelated to the alleged lack of accommodations.

16

Belssner responds by arguing the failure to grant his requests for accommodations resulted

17

in him recovering less than he was entitled to in various lawsuits. He also states that he has been

18

told that the State of Nevada is a “landlord state,” apparently meaning that its laws and/or courts

19

favor landlords. ECF No. 28 at 4-5.

20

II. ANALYSIS

21

In considering a motion to dismiss, “all well-pleaded allegations of material fact are taken

22

as true and construed in a light most favorable to the non-moving party.” Wyler Summit P’ship v.

23

Turner Broad. Sys., Inc., 135 F.3d 658, 661 (9th Cir. 1998). However, I do not necessarily

24

assume the truth of legal conclusions merely because they are cast in the form of factual

25

allegations in the plaintiff’s complaint. See Clegg v. Cult Awareness Network, 18 F.3d 752, 754-

26

55 (9th Cir.1994). A plaintiff must make sufficient factual allegations to establish a plausible

27

entitlement to relief. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 556 (2007). Such allegations

28
Page 2 of 8

1

must amount to “more than labels and conclusions, [or] a formulaic recitation of the elements of a

2

cause of action.” Id. at 555.

3

A. Statute of Limitations

4

Belssner does not respond to the State’s argument that most of his allegations are time-

5
6

barred. I therefore grant this portion of the motion as unopposed. See LR 7-2(d).
Even if Belssner had opposed, the State is correct that much of the Title II claim is barred

7

by the statute of limitations. “Title II of the ADA does not contain an express statute of

8

limitations.” Sharkey v. O’Neal, 778 F.3d 767, 770 (9th Cir. 2015). The court therefore borrows

9

the limitations period for the “most analogous state-law claim, so long as it is not inconsistent

10
11

with federal law or policy to do so.” Id. (quotation omitted).
Title II of the ADA provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason

12

of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services,

13

programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42

14

U.S.C. § 12132. Nevada has a similar statutory provision. Under Nevada Revised Statutes

15

§ 651.070, “[a]ll persons are entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services,

16

facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations of any place of public accommodation,

17

without discrimination or segregation on the ground of . . . disability . . . .” Section 651.090

18

provides a private right of action for violations of § 651.070. The limitations period for bringing

19

a claim under § 651.090 is “1 year from the date of the act complained of.” Nev. Rev. Stat.

20

§ 651.120.

21

Consequently, Belssner had one year from the date of each act of disability discrimination

22

about which he complains to file suit. The State has presented state court records2 showing that

23

most of the state court lawsuits about which Belssner complains had been closed for more than

24

one year before this complaint was filed, or had no activity out of which Belssner’s Title II claim

25
26
27
28

2

I may consider the state court records without converting the motion to dismiss into one
for summary judgment because they are public records subject to judicial notice. Lee v. City of
L.A., 250 F.3d 668, 688-89 (9th Cir. 2001) (citing Fed. R. Evid. 201).

Page 3 of 8

1

could arise within one year prior to his complaint being filed. I will not go through each case in

2

detail here. It suffices to refer the parties to the State’s brief and accompanying exhibits. Thus, to

3

the extent Belssner’s Title II claim is based on an alleged denial of accommodations in any of the

4

following cases, his claim is dismissed with prejudice as untimely:

5

Chris Richards v. Keys of Las Vegas

6

Belssner v. Country Club Shadows

7

Belssner v. Boyd Gaming

8

Belssner v. Ron Bell

9

Belssner v. Blom (Case #11E012478)

10

Belssner v. Blom (Case #11C012032)

11

Belssner v. Atlas Group, LLC

12

Atlas Group v. Belssner

13

B. Failure to State a Claim

14

The State argues the remaining allegations, even if timely, fail to state a claim because

15

Belssner prevailed in one case, he has not shown how a denial of accommodations harmed him in

16

another case, and his other allegations have nothing to do with the State. Belssner does not

17

respond to the specific allegations the State identifies.

18

1. Belssner v. Bobs Autodynamics

19

Belssner alleges in the complaint that he prevailed in the Bobs action but that he was not

20

given a laptop or easel as requested. ECF No. 15 at 5. The State argues Belssner’s Title II claim

21

based on the Bobs case should be dismissed because Belssner was provided with an

22

accommodation and he prevailed in that action.

23

The state court record shows Belssner requested an accommodation and that request was

24

granted in part, although it does not state what was granted and what was denied. ECF No. 22-7.

25

The record also shows Belssner prevailed by obtaining an $80 judgment against Bobs. Id.

26
27

Absent further factual development, Belssner’s complaint does not plausibly allege he was
excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the state court system or that he was

28
Page 4 of 8

1

discriminated against on account of his disability by being denied a laptop or easel; some

2

accommodation was provided, he does not identify why that accommodation was insufficient,

3

and he prevailed in the state court case. See Tennessee v. Lane, 541 U.S. 509, 531-32, (2004)

4

(stating “Title II does not require States to employ any and all means to make judicial services

5

accessible to persons with disabilities,” as it requires “only reasonable modifications that would

6

not fundamentally alter the nature of the service provided” and that would not “impose an undue

7

financial or administrative burden, threaten historic preservation interests, or effect a fundamental

8

alteration in the nature of the service” (quotation omitted)); Thompson v. Davis, 295 F.3d 890,

9

895 (9th Cir. 2002) (stating that one element of a Title II claim is that the plaintiff was “either

10

excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the public entity’s services, programs, or

11

activities, or was otherwise discriminated against by the public entity”). However, because it is

12

possible that Belssner could amend to allege facts in support of a Title II claim in relation to these

13

allegations, this portion of his Title II claim is dismissed without prejudice.
2. Belssner v. Ferranti

14
15

Belssner’s complaint alleges that in relation to the Ferranti action, he attempted to file a

16

notice of appeal on September 8, 2014, but state court personnel requested a filing fee and a bond,

17

told him he had to file a statement of facts, and that certain forms had to be completed. ECF No.

18

15 at 7-8. Belssner eventually was able to fill out the forms, prepare the notice of appeal, and pay

19

for the bond, although it required him to walk over two miles in each direction between the

20

library and the court. Id. at 8. The State argues that Belssner was granted an accommodation in

21

this case and his notice of appeal was filed late, so he lost the lawsuit for a reason unrelated to his

22

disability.

23

The state court record shows Belssner requested an accommodation and that request was

24

granted in part, although it does not state what was granted and what was denied. ECF No. 22-10.

25

The state court record shows that Belssner’s appeal was denied but it does not state why. Id. The

26

case was a small claims action in justice court. Id. The final order denying Belssner’s objections

27

in justice court was entered on August 14, 2014. Id. Belssner filed a notice of appeal on

28
Page 5 of 8

1

September 8. Id. That is beyond the five-day window for filing appeals from a small claims case

2

in justice court. Justice Ct. R. Civ. P. 98.

3

Belssner’s complaint describes some difficulties he had in getting his notice of appeal

4

filed. Belssner states that he was told a particular form had to be filled out legibly, but he

5

responded that he could not do so due to “tremors.” ECF No. 15 at 8. Belssner alleges that at first

6

he was told he could fill out the form online, but then he was told it had to be printed and filled

7

out manually. Belssner alleges he had to walk over two miles to the library to use a typewriter,

8

and then walk back to the courthouse to file the form.

9

It is unclear from the complaint whether Belssner’s tremors relate to a disability such that

10

the failure to provide an accommodation may have violated Title II. The disabilities Belssner

11

identifies in his complaint are hearing and speech related. He also does not allege sufficient facts

12

about what accommodations he requested, what accommodations were denied or granted, why

13

the accommodation given was insufficient, or the nature of the form he was asked to fill out (i.e.,

14

was it lengthy such that providing assistance would have been burdensome).

15

I therefore will dismiss the portion of Belssner’s Title II claim based on what occurred

16

during the Ferranti case. However, I grant leave to amend to add factual allegations (if they

17

exist) that plausibly would support a Title II claim in relation to his allegations that (1) he was

18

denied reasonable accommodations during the underlying case and (2) he was denied reasonable

19

accommodations in filling out a form required to file his notice of appeal. See McGary v. City of

20

Portland, 386 F.3d 1259, 1266-67 (9th Cir. 2004) (explaining that the “crux of a reasonable

21

accommodation claim is a facially neutral requirement that is consistently enforced” that burdens

22

disabled persons “in a manner different and greater than it burdens others, and, therefore,

23

necessitates accommodation” (quotation omitted)). Absent more detailed allegations about

24

Belssner’s disabilities, what accommodations were requested in relation to this case, what

25

accommodations were offered and/or provided, and how he was either excluded from

26

participation in or denied the benefits of access to the State’s courts (or was otherwise

27

discriminated against by the State), there are no allegations to plausibly support a Title II claim.

28
Page 6 of 8

1
2

3. Allegations About Other Cases Not Involving Belssner
Belssner’s complaint refers to several actions or incidents that do not appear to be related

3

to his Title II claim against the State. For example, he references that he informed the State

4

Contractors Board and the police about a homeowners association with an unlicensed contractor

5

who embezzled over $1 million. He also references that someone named Kathy Rouse

6

encouraged him to file a motion to rescind an order of summary eviction in relation to Oasis

7

Winds. And he alleges he has attempted to obtain aid from organizations such as Protection &

8

Advocacy Inc. of San Diego, Desert Legal Aid, and the Nevada Disability Advocacy Center, but

9

those organizations have not assisted him. Id. at 11. It is unclear what relation, if any, these

10

allegations have to Belssner’s Title II claim against the State. To the extent they are meant to

11

form the basis of a Title II claim (as opposed to background or contextual allegations), they are

12

dismissed for failure to plausibly allege the State violated Title II.

13

III. CONCLUSION

14

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant State of Nevada’s motion to dismiss

15

(ECF No. 22) is GRANTED. Plaintiff Charles Belssner’s Title II claim is dismissed with

16

prejudice to the extent it rests on allegations related to the following cases:

17

Chris Richards v. Keys of Las Vegas

18

Belssner v. Country Club Shadows

19

Belssner v. Boyd Gaming

20

Belssner v. Ron Bell

21

Belssner v. Blom (Case #11E012478)

22

Belssner v. Blom (Case #11C012032)

23

Belssner v. Atlas Group, LLC

24

Atlas Group v. Belssner

25
26
27

The remainder of his Title II claim is dismissed without prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if plaintiff Charles Belssner chooses to amend his
complaint to correct the deficiencies identified in this order, he must file an amended complaint

28
Page 7 of 8

1

on or before August 14, 2017. Failure to file an amended complaint by that date will result in this

2

case being closed.

3

DATED this 12th day of July, 2017.

4
5
6

ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 8 of 8