Langer v. Kiser

Opinion

United States District Court SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CHRIS LANGER, Civil Action No. 18-cv-00195-BEN-AHG

Plaintiff, V. See attachment JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

Defendant.

Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a decision has been rendered. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: Plaintiff failed to carry his burden of proof as to the ADA claim because the East Lot is not a place of public accommodation, and even if it was, Plaintiff was not denied equal access. Defendants are the prevailing party as to the ADA claim, and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in their favor. See, e.g., FED. R. CIV. P. 54(d)(1) (allowing courts to award costs to the prevailing party in a case); CRST Van Expedited, Inc. v. E.E.O.C., 136 S. Ct. 1642, 1651 (2016) (holding “‘that a defendant need not obtain a favorable judgment on the merits in order to be a ‘prevailing party’” and “has . . . fulfilled its primary objective whenever the plaintiff’s challenge is rebuffed”); 42 U.S.C. $12205 (providing that ADA action, “the court. . . in its discretion, may allow theprevailing party . . . a reasonable attorney’s fee, including litigation expenses, and costs”). The Court declines the invitation to exercise supplemental jurisdiction overPlaintiff’s UCRA state law claim and Defendants’ counterclaim for trespass arising under California law. Accordingly, these claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Date: 2/1/21 CLERK OF COURT JOHN MORRILL, Clerk of Court By: s/ M. Exler M. Exler, Deputy