Michael Harrison v. SAT Professionals, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Central District of California ordered the plaintiff to show cause why the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over claims under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act and any other state-law claims. The court also required information concerning the statutory damages sought and declarations addressing whether the plaintiff and counsel qualify as high-frequency litigants under California law, with a response due March 11, 2025.

Holdings

1. The court ordered plaintiff to show cause in writing why it should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Civil Rights Act claim and any other state-law claims alleged in the complaint.
2. The court required plaintiff to identify the amount of statutory damages sought and required plaintiff and counsel to submit declarations under penalty of perjury containing facts necessary to determine whether they satisfy California's definition of a high-frequency litigant.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Civil Rights Act claim and any other state-law claims under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1367(a) and 1367(c).
2. What information plaintiff and plaintiff's counsel must provide concerning the amount of statutory damages and high-frequency-litigant status under California law.

Disposition

other