Case: Dunn v. City of Los Angeles

2:20-cv-00420 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: Jan. 15, 2020

Closed Date: June 6, 2022

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

This is a case about the ability of a person with a disability to access the City of Los Angeles’ Administrative Citation Enforcement program, which is an alternative to court prosecutions for minor offenses, and primarily affects those that are homeless, disabled and/or indigent. On January 15, 2020, the non-profit Community Action Program, CANGRESS, on behalf of an individual plaintiff, filed this lawsuit the U.S. District Court, Western District of California. The plaintiff sued the City of …

This is a case about the ability of a person with a disability to access the City of Los Angeles’ Administrative Citation Enforcement program, which is an alternative to court prosecutions for minor offenses, and primarily affects those that are homeless, disabled and/or indigent.

On January 15, 2020, the non-profit Community Action Program, CANGRESS, on behalf of an individual plaintiff, filed this lawsuit the U.S. District Court, Western District of California. The plaintiff sued the City of Los Angeles under Section 1983 for violations of the 14th Amendment and under Title II of the ADA because he was unable to access the ACE program due to his disabilities and due to his lack of access to and inability to use the internet. Plaintiff relied on a Monell claim to establish the city's liability. He was represented by Disability Rights California. The case was assigned to Judge Dolly M. Gee.

On June 3, 2022, the parties notified the court that they entered into a settlement agreement. Per the terms of the settlement agreement, the city agreed to void plaintiff's ACE citation, including all assessed fees and late payment penalties. The city committed to revise forms to make clear that the availability of reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities and various other administrative changes to make the program more accessible both in person and online.  

The case was dismissed with prejudice on June 6, 2022.

Summary Authors

NDRN (12/26/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16699277/parties/larry-dunn-v-city-of-los-angeles/


Judge(s)

Aenlle-Rocha, Fernando Lazoro (California)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Alarcon, Monique Amanda (California)

Attorney for Defendant

Dermer, Gabriel Seth (California)

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case
1

2:20-cv-00420

Civil Rights Complaint

Jan. 15, 2020

Jan. 15, 2020

Complaint
4

2:20-cv-00420

Civil Rights Complaint

Jan. 15, 2020

Jan. 15, 2020

Complaint
13

2:20-cv-00420

Order re: Stipulation to Permit Plaintiffs to File an Amended Complaint No Later Than April 13, 2020 [12]

March 13, 2020

March 13, 2020

Order/Opinion
13

2:20-cv-00420

Order re: Stipulation to Permit Plaintiffs to File an Amended Complaint No Later Than April 13, 2020 [12]

March 13, 2020

March 13, 2020

Order/Opinion
62-1

2:20-cv-00420

Settlement Agreement and General Relase

June 3, 2022

June 3, 2022

Settlement Agreement

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16699277/larry-dunn-v-city-of-los-angeles/

Last updated Nov. 3, 2026, 3:53 a.m.

Docket for: Larry Dunn v. City of Los Angeles
ECF Number Date Description Link
1 Jan. 15, 2020

COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973-25129644 - Fee: $400, filed by plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attorney Carol A Sobel added to party Larry Dunn(pty:pla))(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 01/15/2020)

RECAP
2 Jan. 15, 2020

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 01/15/2020)

RECAP
3 Jan. 15, 2020

CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn, (Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 01/15/2020)

RECAP
4 Jan. 15, 2020

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendant City of Los Angeles amending Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) 1, filed by plaintiff Larry Dunn(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 01/15/2020)

RECAP
5 Jan. 16, 2020

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dolly M. Gee and Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. (lh) (Entered: 01/16/2020)

RECAP
6 Jan. 16, 2020

NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (lh) (Entered: 01/16/2020)

RECAP
7 Jan. 16, 2020

INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Dolly M. Gee. (kti) (Entered: 01/16/2020)

RECAP
8 Jan. 22, 2020

Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) 1 filed by plaintiff Cangress, Larry Dunn. (Rowland, Weston) (Entered: 01/22/2020)

RECAP
9 Jan. 24, 2020

21-Day Summons Issued re Complaint 1 as to Defendant City of Los Angeles. (gk) (Entered: 01/24/2020)

RECAP
10 Feb. 5, 2020

STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to City of Los Angeles answer now due 3/19/2020, filed by defendant City of Los Angeles.(Attorney Felix Lebron added to party City of Los Angeles(pty:dft))(Lebron, Felix) (Entered: 02/05/2020)

RECAP
11 March 11, 2020

Request for Clarification filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn re Title III ADA referral (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Removing case from ADA Title III Referral)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 03/11/2020)

RECAP
12 March 13, 2020

STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Amend filed by plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Extend Time to Amend Complaint)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 03/13/2020)

RECAP
13 March 13, 2020

ORDER RE: STIPULATION TO PERMIT PLAINTIFFS TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT NO LATER THAN APRIL 13, 2020 by Judge Dolly M. Gee. The Court finds that the parties are acting expeditiously in this matter and that there is good cause to grant the requested Stipulation. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are granted leave to and through April 13, 2020 to file a Second Amended Complaint. IT IS SO ORDERED. (SEE ORDER FOR FURTHER DETAILS) 12 (yl) (Entered: 03/16/2020)

RECAP
14 April 7, 2020

Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Monique Amanda Alarcon counsel for Plaintiffs Cangress, Larry Dunn. Monique A. Alarcon is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiffs Monique A. Alarcon. (Alarcon, Monique) (Entered: 04/07/2020)

RECAP
15 April 13, 2020

STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Amend filed by PLAINTIFF Cangress, Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Re Stipulation to Extend Time to File Amended Complaint)(Rowland, Weston) (Entered: 04/13/2020)

RECAP
16 April 15, 2020

ORDER TO EXTEND PLAINTIFFS' TIME TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT BY NOT MORE THAN 30 DAYS by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Upon Stipulation 15, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' time to file the Second Amended Complaint is extended to 5/13/2020. (gk) (Entered: 04/16/2020)

RECAP
17 May 13, 2020

STIPULATION for Extension of Time to Amend filed by PLAINTIFF Cangress, Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Proposed Order Re Stipulation to Extend Time to File Amended Complaint)(Rowland, Weston) (Entered: 05/13/2020)

RECAP
18 May 14, 2020

ORDER TO EXTEND PLAINTIFFS' TIME TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT BY NOT MORE THAN 30 DAYS by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Upon Stipulation 17, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs' shall file their Second Amended Complaint by 6/3/2020. (gk) (Entered: 05/14/2020)

RECAP
19 June 11, 2020

MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court, on its own motion, orders plaintiff(s) to show cause in writing on or before 6/18/2020 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. As an alternative to a written response by plaintiff(s), the Court will consider the filing of one of the following, as an appropriate response to this Order To Show Cause, on or before the above date, as evidence that the matter is being prosecuted diligently: An answer by the defendant(s); or, Plaintiff's application for entry of default pursuant to Rule 55a of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Order will stand submitted upon the filing of a responsive pleading or motion on or before the date upon which a response by plaintiff(s) is due. This action will be dismissed if the above-mentioned document(s) are not filed by the date indicated above. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk) (Entered: 06/11/2020)

RECAP
20 June 18, 2020

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT against DEFENDANT City of Los Angeles amending Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) 1, Amended Complaint/Petition 4 JURY DEMAND, filed by PLAINTIFF Larry Dunn, Cangress(Rowland, Weston) (Entered: 06/18/2020)

RECAP
21 June 19, 2020

NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Amended Complaint/Petition 20 . The following error(s) was/were found: Caption of document is incomplete/incorrect. Plaintiffs were granted leave to amend by 6/3/2020. The party caption reads, "Larry Dunn, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Los Angeles County; and Does 1 to 10, Defendants." The term "et al." should not be used on a controlling pleading. Pages 5 and 6 name plaintiffs as Larry Dunn and Cangress also known as the Los Angeles Community Action Network; and Defendant as City of Los Angeles. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (gk) (Entered: 06/19/2020)

RECAP
22 June 25, 2020

STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to City of Los Angeles answer now due 7/23/2020, re Amended Complaint/Petition 20 filed by defendant City of Los Angeles.(Lebron, Felix) (Entered: 06/25/2020)

RECAP
23 June 29, 2020

NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Stipulation Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less) 22 . The following error(s) was/were found: Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is: Stipulations > Extending Time to Answer (More than 30 days). The filer used the event, Stipulations > Extending Time to Answer (30 days or less), for docketing this filing. Stipulations for extension of time as to cross-claims, counterclaims, third-party complaints or any amended or supplemental pleadings require approval by the judge, Local Rule 8-3. Proposed Order not submitted herewith. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (gk) (Entered: 06/29/2020)

RECAP
24 June 30, 2020

ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND DEFENDANT'S TIME TO RESPOND TO SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Upon Stipulation 22, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's time to respond to the Second Amended Complaint 20 is extended until 7/23/2020. (gk) (Entered: 07/01/2020)

RECAP
25 July 6, 2020

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER by Judge Dolly M. Gee. The Order to Show Cause dated June 11, 2020 19 is DISCHARGED. IT IS SO ORDERED. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (kti) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 07/06/2020)

RECAP
July 7, 2020

Text Only Scheduling Notice

26 July 23, 2020

ANSWER to Amended Complaint/Petition 20 with JURY DEMAND ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL filed by defendant City of Los Angeles.(Lebron, Felix) (Entered: 07/23/2020)

RECAP
27 July 23, 2020

NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by defendant City of Los Angeles, (Lebron, Felix) (Entered: 07/23/2020)

RECAP
28 July 24, 2020

SCHEDULING MEETING OF COUNSEL [Fed. R. Civ. P. 16, 26(f)] by Judge Dolly M. Gee. Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 8/21/2020. Scheduling Conference set for 9/4/2020 at 9:30 a.m. (See order for details.) (kti) (Entered: 07/24/2020)

RECAP
29 Aug. 12, 2020

STIPULATION to Continue Rule 26 Report filing from August 21, 2020 to October 16, 2020 filed by plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order to extend time for Rule 26 compliance)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 08/12/2020)

RECAP
30 Aug. 14, 2020

ORDER RE STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE RULE 26 CONFERENCE AND REPORT by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Upon Stipulation 29, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Scheduling Conference is continued to 10/23/2020 at 09:30 AM before Judge Dolly M. Gee. The parties shall file their Joint Rule 26(f) Report by 10/16/2020. Further, Plaintiffs shall advise the Court on how they wish to proceed with their request for clarification 11 forthwith. (gk) (Entered: 08/14/2020)

RECAP
31 Oct. 1, 2020

Notice of Withdrawing Request for ADA clarification filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn re: Miscellaneous Document 11 (Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 10/01/2020)

RECAP
32 Oct. 2, 2020

Second STIPULATION to Continue Scheduling Conference from October 23, 2020 to December 11, 2020 Re: Order,, Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings, 30 filed by plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 10/02/2020)

RECAP
33 Oct. 6, 2020

ORDER RE: SECOND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE RULE 26 CONFERENCE by Judge Dolly M. Gee: Upon Stipulation 32, the Court continues the Scheduling Conference to 12/11/2020 at 09:30 AM before Judge Dolly M. Gee. The parties shall file the Joint Rule 26 Report on or by 12/4/2020. The meeting of the parties to prepare the Joint Report shall occur by 11/20/2020. (gk) (Entered: 10/06/2020)

RECAP
34 Dec. 7, 2020

MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES by Judge Dolly M. Gee: On 7/24/2020, the Court set a Scheduling Conference 28 . As required by the Court's 7/24/2020 Order, Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f), and Local Rule 26-1, counsel are required to file a Joint Rule 26(f) Report. To date, a Joint Rule 26(f) Report has not been filed. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties show cause in writing no later than 12/14/2020, why sanctions should not be imposed for their failure to cooperate and participate with opposing counsel in a Rule 26(f) conference and for failure to file a Joint Rule 26(f) Report. The filing of a Joint Rule 26(f) Report by the deadline will be deemed a satisfactory response. Failure to timely respond to this Order to Show Cause will result in the dismissal of this action for lack of prosecution. The scheduling conference on 12/11/2020 is hereby VACATED and will be rescheduled if necessary. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk) (Entered: 12/07/2020)

RECAP
35 Dec. 11, 2020

RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Cangress to OSC re Sanctions (Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 12/11/2020)

RECAP
36 Dec. 14, 2020

MINUTES OF IN CHAMBERS - ORDER by Judge Dolly M. Gee: The Court has reviewed the parties' response to the Order to Show Cause 35 . Accordingly, the parties shall file a further joint status report or Joint Rule 26(f) Report by 2/12/2021. The Order to Show Cause dated 12/7/2020 34 is discharged. Court Reporter: Not Reported. (gk) (Entered: 12/15/2020)

RECAP
37 Dec. 29, 2020

ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE (#20-196) approved by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. Pursuant to the recommended procedure adopted by the Court for the CREATION OF CALENDAR of Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha, this case is transferred from Judge Dolly M. Gee to the calendar of Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:20-cv-00420 FLA (JPRx). (esa) (Entered: 12/29/2020)

RECAP
38 Feb. 12, 2021

STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 02/12/2021)

RECAP
39 Feb. 23, 2021

ORDER RE: JOINT STATUS REPORT 38 by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha : The Court sets Scheduling Conference for April 2, 2021 at 1:00 p.m. and directs the parties to file a further status report or a Joint Rule 26 Report no later than March 12, 2021. If the parties reach an agreement on settlement prior to that time, they are to notify the Court of a tentative settlement within 7 days of such agreement. (lc) (Entered: 02/24/2021)

RECAP
40 Feb. 24, 2021

INITIAL STANDING ORDER by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha. (rrey) (Entered: 02/24/2021)

RECAP
Feb. 24, 2021

Initial Order upon Filing of Complaint - form only

41 March 12, 2021

STATUS REPORT re Settlement Discussions filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 03/12/2021)

RECAP
42 March 19, 2021

ORDER DENYING CONTINUANCE OF SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET FOR APRIL 2, 2021; PARTIES SUBMIT A JOINT RULE 26(f) REPORTY BY MARCH 26, 2021 41 by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha (lc) (Entered: 03/19/2021)

RECAP
43 March 26, 2021

JOINT REPORT Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan ; estimated length of trial 3-4 days, filed by Plaintiff Cangress.. (Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 03/26/2021)

RECAP
44 March 29, 2021

ORDER RE: SCHEDULE OF PRETRIAL AND TRIAL DATES, TRIAL REQUIREMENTS, AND CONDUCT OF ATTORNEYS AND PARTIES by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: Final Pretrial Conference set for 2/4/2022 03:00 PM ; Motion in Limine set for hearing on 2/4/2022 at 03:00 PM ; Jury Trial set for 2/15/2022 08:30 AM (SEE DOCUMENT FOR ALL SPECIFIED DEADLINES). (lc) (Entered: 03/29/2021)

RECAP
45 April 2, 2021

TEXT ENTRY (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER VACATING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: In light of the Order Re: Schedule of Pretrial and Trial Dates, Trial Requirements, and Conduct of Attorneys and Parties 44 filed on March 29, 2021, the Scheduling Conference currently set for April 2, 2021 is VACATED. No appearances are necessary. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (vv) (Entered: 04/02/2021)

RECAP
April 2, 2021

Text Only Scheduling Notice

46 April 19, 2021

(STRICKEN PER 4/30/2021 ORDER DOCKET NO. 50). Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Aisha Cheri Novasky counsel for Plaintiff Larry Dunn. Adding Aisha C. Novasky as counsel of record for Larry Dunn for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Aisha C. Novasky. (Attorney Aisha Cheri Novasky added to party Larry Dunn(pty:pla))(Novasky, Aisha) Modified on 4/30/2021 (lc). (Entered: 04/19/2021)

RECAP
47 April 19, 2021

Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Lili V Graham counsel for Plaintiff Larry Dunn. Adding Lili V. Graham as counsel of record for Larry Dunn for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attorney Lili V Graham added to party Larry Dunn(pty:pla))(Graham, Lili) (Entered: 04/19/2021)

RECAP
48 April 20, 2021

PROOF OF SERVICE filed by plaintiff Larry Dunn, served on 4/19/2021. (Novasky, Aisha) (Entered: 04/20/2021)

RECAP
49 April 22, 2021

(STRICKEN PER 4/30/2021 ORDER DOCKET NO. 50). Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Aisha Cheri Novasky counsel for Plaintiff Larry Dunn. Adding Aisha C. Novasky as counsel of record for Larry Dunn for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Novasky, Aisha) Modified on 4/30/2021 (lc). (Entered: 04/22/2021)

RECAP
50 April 30, 2021

ORDER by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: the following document(s) be STRICKEN for failure to comply with the Local Rules, General Order and/or the Courts Case Management Order: Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123), 46, Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123), 49, for the following reasons: The notices do not clearly reflect the appearance of counsel. Refer to the Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel [Dkt. 47] filed on April 19, 2021 as an example. (lc) (Entered: 04/30/2021)

RECAP
51 May 5, 2021

Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Aisha Cheri Novasky counsel for Plaintiff Larry Dunn. Adding Aisha C. Novasky as counsel of record for Larry Dunn for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Novasky, Aisha) (Entered: 05/05/2021)

RECAP
52 Dec. 29, 2021

STIPULATION to Continue Date to complete settlement from December 30, 2021 to January 31, 2022 filed by plaintiff Cangress. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Amend Scheduling Order re Settlement Cut-off)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 12/29/2021)

RECAP
53 Jan. 3, 2022

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED REQUEST TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLETE SETTLEMENT TO JANUARY 30, 2022 52 by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha. (lc) (Entered: 01/03/2022)

RECAP
54 Jan. 26, 2022

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: On January 3, 2022, the court granted the parties' request to extend time to complete settlement to January 30, 2022. (Dkt. 53 ). The court ordered that all other deadlines, including deadlines to file pretrial documents, remained unchanged. Id. The parties, however, failed to timely file pretrial documents. The court ORDERS Plaintiffs to Show Cause ("OSC") in writing by February 4, 2022 why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. The filing of a notice of settlement will be deemed a satisfactory response to the OSC. The court VACATES the final pretrial conference and trial dates in this action.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (tf) TEXT ONLY ENTRY Modified on 1/28/2022 (tf). (Entered: 01/26/2022)

RECAP
Jan. 26, 2022

Text Only Scheduling Notice

55 Feb. 4, 2022

Notice of Settlement filed by Plaintiffs Cangress, Larry Dunn and Request to Retain Jurisdiction for 60 days (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order re Settlement and Retention of Jurisdiction)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 02/04/2022)

RECAP
56 Feb. 7, 2022

NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Miscellaneous Document 55 . The following error(s) was/were found: Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is: Notice of Settlement. Other error(s) with document(s): Note: To assist in a search for correct events, please use the "SEARCH" option for a "key word" to narrow the selection process. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (lc) (Entered: 02/07/2022)

RECAP
57 Feb. 8, 2022

ORDER FOR PARTIES TO FILE JOINT STATUS REPORT REGARDING SETTLEMENT 55 by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: Having reviewed the Notice of Settlement and finding good cause therefor, the court ORDERS the parties to file a joint status report regarding the status of settlement by Friday, April 8, 2022. If the parties complete the final review sooner than 60 days, they are to file a Dismissal with Prejudice within five days of such agreement, in lieu of a joint status report. (lc) (Entered: 02/08/2022)

RECAP
58 April 8, 2022

STATUS REPORT RE SETTLEMENT filed by Plaintiff Cangress. (Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 04/08/2022)

RECAP
59 April 18, 2022

(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: Having reviewed and considered the parties' joint status report regarding settlement, filed on April 8, 2022, (Dkt. 58 ), the court ORDERS the parties to file a further joint status report or a request for dismissal on or before May 6, 2022. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (tf) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 04/18/2022)

RECAP
April 19, 2022

Text Only Scheduling Notice

60 May 6, 2022

STATUS REPORT re settlement filed by Plaintiff Cangress. (Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 05/06/2022)

RECAP
61 May 9, 2022

IN CHAMBERS (ORDER) by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha: Having reviewed and considered the Parties' May 6, 2022 Joint Status Report, (Dkt. 60 ), the court EXTENDS the deadline to complete settlement to June 6, 2022, and orders the parties to file a further joint status report or request for dismissal on or before that date. Any further joint status report must include specific facts regarding the Parties' efforts to complete settlement proceedings diligently. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (tf) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 05/09/2022)

RECAP
May 9, 2022

Text Only Scheduling Notice

62 June 3, 2022

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT and Request for Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Larry Dunn. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Settlement Agreement signed, # 2 Proposed Order re Dismissal on Settlement)(Sobel, Carol) (Entered: 06/03/2022)

1 Exhibit Settlement Agreement signed

View on RECAP

2 Proposed Order re Dismissal on Settlement

View on PACER

RECAP
63 June 6, 2022

ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha : On June 3, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Completed Settlement and Request for Dismissal 62 . Having considered the Notice and finding good cause therefor, the court DISMISSES this action with prejudice.. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lc) (Entered: 06/06/2022)

RECAP

Case Details

State / Territory:

California

Case Type(s):

Disability Rights

Criminal Justice (Other)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Jan. 15, 2020

Closing Date: June 6, 2022

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

individual plaintiff and non profit organization

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Private Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

NDRN/Protection & Advocacy Organizations

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

City

City of Los Angeles

Case Details

Causes of Action:

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.

Constitutional Clause(s):

Due Process

Due Process: Procedural Due Process

Due Process: Substantive Due Process

Other Dockets:

Central District of California 2:20-cv-00420

Available Documents:

Any published opinion

Complaint (any)

Trial Court Docket

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Plaintiff OR Mixed

Relief Granted:

Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Conditional Dismissal

Issues

Disability and Disability Rights:

Disability, unspecified

Discrimination Basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Recommended Citation