Sam Benford v. Karte, 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 state-law claims arising from alleged disability-access violations. The court directs the plaintiff and counsel to provide information concerning statutory damages and whether they qualify as high-frequency litigants, warning that inadequate responses may result in dismissal of the state-law claims.

Holdings

1. The court did not make a final decision on supplemental jurisdiction; instead, it ordered plaintiff to show cause why the court should exercise jurisdiction over the state-law claims.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff's Unruh Act, California Disabled Persons Act, California Health and Safety Code section 19955 et seq., and negligence claims.
2. Whether plaintiff must provide information concerning the amount of statutory damages sought and whether plaintiff qualifies as a high-frequency litigant before the court decides whether to retain the state-law claims.

Disposition

other