Moises Villalobos v. Michael Rodriguez et al.

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 claims under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. The court discussed the discretionary nature of supplemental jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1367 and California’s heightened pleading and high-frequency-litigant provisions for construction-related accessibility claims. Plaintiff was ordered to respond within fourteen days and identify the statutory damages sought and provide declarations addressing high-frequency-litigant status.

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), including dismissal of all claims within original jurisdiction or exceptional circumstances presenting compelling reasons.
2. Plaintiff must respond to the order to show cause within fourteen days, identify the statutory damages sought, and submit declarations under penalty of perjury addressing facts necessary to determine whether Plaintiff and counsel meet California's definition of high-frequency litigants.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's Unruh Civil Rights Act claim and related state-law claims.
2. What information Plaintiff must provide concerning statutory damages and the parties' potential status as high-frequency litigants before the court decides whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.

Disposition

other