Kelley v. Related Management Company, L.P.

• Court: District Court, N.D. California
• Decided: June 12, 2023
• Docket: 3:22-cv-04458
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CURTIS KELLEY, Case No. 22-cv-04458-SK

8 Plaintiff, ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS TO 9 v. ENFORCE OR VACATE INJUNCTION

10 RELATED MANAGEMENT COMPANY, L.P., et al., Regarding Docket Nos. 39, 43 11 Defendants. 12 13 Now before the Court are the cross-motions filed by the parties to enforce or vacate the 14 stipulated injunction. On November 7, 2022, Plaintiff filed a motion for a preliminary injunction 15 to provide for a wheelchair-accessible entrance to his apartment or to transfer him to another unit 16 that is wheelchair-accessible. (Dkt. No. 25.) On November 28, 2022, Defendants filed an 17 opposition to Plaintiff’s motion. (Dkt. No. 30.) In support of their opposition, Defendants filed a 18 declaration from Eric J. Stephenson, in which he stated that he had been searching for a hotel 19 room that met Plaintiff’s specifications but that Defendants have had difficulty finding such an 20 available room. (Dkt. No. 30-1, ¶ 5.) A few days before the hearing on Plaintiff’s motion, the 21 parties filed a stipulation for entry of an order resolving the pending motion for preliminary 22 injunction. (Dkt. No. 33.) The Court approved the parties’ stipulation and entered an order on 23 January 6, 2023, that required Defendants, as stipulated, to: 24 a. Provide temporary housing accommodations mutually agreed upon by the parties for Plaintiff that contain the following 25 features: (1) The accommodations will be compliant with regulations for accessible hotel rooms under the Americans with 26 Disabilities Act, including a “roll-in” shower; (2) The accommodations will provide kitchen facilities comparable to 27 those available in his studio apartment; (3) The temporary accommodations will be located in San Francisco proper to b. Provide a fully electronically adjustable hospital bed, with 1 separate adjustments for head, knees, and height, at least 42 inches wide; 2 c. Provide transportation of Plaintiff and his belongings (including 3 his wheelchair and Hoyer lift) to the hotel, and home when Plaintiff’s apartment is ready, in a wheelchair accessible van. 4 (Dkt. No. 34.) In the stipulated Order, Defendants recognized “that living in a hotel is difficult 5 and disruptive for Plaintiff.” (Id.) Currently, Defendants are housing Plaintiff in a hotel room 6 with no kitchen facilities. Plaintiff is on a strict, very low sodium diet, and he has difficulty 7 adhering to that diet without a kitchen to prepare fresh meals. (Dkt. No. 39-1 (Declaration of 8 Curtis Kelly), ¶¶ 13-16, Ex. 3.) Moreover, even though Defendants knew that living in a hotel is 9 very difficult for Plaintiff, Defendants did not even apply for the permit to make modifications to 10 his residence until May 10, 2023. (Dkt. No. 43-3 (Declaration of Alicia Ruiz), ¶ 30.) 11 “A district court has inherent authority to modify a preliminary injunction in consideration 12 of new facts.” A&M Recs., Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 284 F.3d 1091, 1098 (9th Cir. 2002) (citing 13 System Federation No. 91 v. Wright, 364 U.S. 642, 647-48 (1961) (holding that a district court has 14 “wide discretion” to modify an injunction based on changed circumstances or new facts); Tanner 15 Motor Livery, Ltd. v. Avis, Inc., 316 F.2d 804, 810 (9th Cir.1963) (same)). However, the Court 16 finds that Defendants have not demonstrated any new facts or changed circumstances. Therefore, 17 the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion requiring Defendants to comply with the Order entered on 18 January 6. 2023 and DENIES Defendants’ motion to vacate or modify the Order. Additionally, to 19 compensate Plaintiff for the difficulty in accommodating his prescribed diet and living in a hotel 20 room, and to encourage Defendants to move quickly to find Plaintiff accommodations that comply 21 with the Court’s Order and the parties’ stipulation, the Court HEREBY IMPOSES a daily penalty 22 of $100 to be paid directly to Plaintiff’s counsel for Plaintiff’s benefit. 23 / / / 24 / / / 25 / / / 26 / / / 27 / / / 1 This amount shall be paid for every day that Plaintiff is not housed in accommodations which 2 || comply with the Order. (Dkt. No. 34.) Plaintiff can use this money to buy healthy, low-sodium 3 || prepared food, if feasible. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 || Dated: June 12, 2023 + 6 Atthen [rw SALLIE KIM 7 United States Magistrate Judge 8 9 10 11 12

© 15 16

= 17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28