Melanie Delapaz v. Gonzalez Glass & Mirrors Inc., Antonio Gonzalez, and Does 1 to 10

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California issued an order to show cause regarding whether it should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s California-law claims in an ADA accessibility action. The court directed the plaintiff to identify the statutory damages sought and required declarations addressing whether the plaintiff and counsel meet California’s definition of high-frequency litigants. The response was ordered within fourteen days, with failure to respond potentially resulting in dismissal of the state-law claims without further warning.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Delapaz's Unruh Act, California Disabled Persons Act, California Health and Safety Code, and negligence claims.
2. Whether Delapaz and her counsel must provide information and declarations addressing the statutory definition of a high-frequency litigant before the court determines whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.

Disposition

other