Bernard Taruc v. Medas Upholstery Inc., et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California orders the plaintiff to show cause why the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over claims under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act and related state-law claims. The court directs the plaintiff and counsel to identify the statutory damages sought and submit declarations addressing whether they qualify as high-frequency litigants under California law. The response is due within 14 days, and failure to respond may result in dismissal of the state-law claims without further notice.

Holdings

1. Supplemental jurisdiction is discretionary rather than a right of the plaintiff, and the district court may decline to exercise it under the circumstances identified in 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c).
2. Before determining whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, the court may require plaintiff and counsel to show cause and provide declarations addressing the amount of statutory damages sought and whether they qualify as high-frequency litigants under California law.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff's Unruh Act claim and any related state-law claims.
2. What information plaintiff and counsel must provide to permit the court to evaluate whether declining supplemental jurisdiction is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c), including the amount of statutory damages sought and whether plaintiff or counsel qualifies as a high-frequency litigant.

Disposition

other