Case: Hood v. City of Sacramento

2:23-cv-00232 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California

Filed Date: Feb. 7, 2023

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On February 7, 2023, two individuals filed this putative class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and other individuals with mobility disabilities in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The plaintiffs sued the city of Sacramento and Sacramento County under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act, and state law. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. They claimed that the defendan…

On February 7, 2023, two individuals filed this putative class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and other individuals with mobility disabilities in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. The plaintiffs sued the city of Sacramento and Sacramento County under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act, and state law. Represented by private counsel, the plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief. They claimed that the defendants' failure to maintain clear sidewalks had violated their right to access public accommodations. 

The plaintiffs sought to certify a class defined as “all Sacramento residents with mobility disabilities who have used, use, or will use, the sidewalks in the defendant city, and defendant county, through the date of judgment in the action.”

The plaintiffs specifically alleged that the defendants had violated the ADA, Rehabilitation Act, and state law by failing to clear sidewalks of debris and tent encampments of unsheltered people. The plaintiffs claimed that a rise in the population of unsheltered people had left sidewalks covered by shelters, leaving people with disabilities unable to utilize the sidewalks because they were completely blocked by these shelters. 

As of March 12, 2023, this case was ongoing. 

Summary Authors

Rhea Sharma (3/12/2023)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66797443/parties/hood-v-city-of-sacramento/


Judge(s)

Mueller, Kimberly Jo (California)

Judge(s)

Mueller, Kimberly Jo (California)

show all people

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document
1

2:23-cv-00232

Class Action Complaint

Feb. 7, 2023

Feb. 7, 2023

Complaint

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/66797443/hood-v-city-of-sacramento/

Last updated March 10, 2024, 4:03 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT against All Plaintiffs by Susan Hood, Chester McNabb. (Filing fee $ 402, receipt number ACAEDC-10686090) (Demas, Louis) (Entered: 02/07/2023)

Feb. 7, 2023

Feb. 7, 2023

Clearinghouse
2

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Susan Hood, Chester McNabb (Demas, Louis) (Entered: 02/07/2023)

Feb. 7, 2023

Feb. 7, 2023

PACER
3

SUMMONS ISSUED as to *City of Sacramento, Sacramento County* with answer to complaint due within *21* days. Attorney *Louis Demas* *Attorney at Law* *2713 E Street* *Sacramento, CA 95816*. (Mena-Sanchez, L) (Entered: 02/08/2023)

Feb. 8, 2023

Feb. 8, 2023

PACER
4

CIVIL NEW CASE DOCUMENTS ISSUED; Initial Scheduling Conference SET for 6/29/2023 at 02:30 PM in Courtroom 3 (KJM) before Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. (Attachments: # 1 Standing Order, # 2 Consent Form, # 3 VDRP) (Mena-Sanchez, L) (Entered: 02/08/2023)

Feb. 8, 2023

Feb. 8, 2023

PACER
5

SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: City of Sacramento (Christine Saunders) served on 2/10/2023, answer due 3/3/2023. (Demas, Louis) Modified on 2/22/2023 (Benson, A.). (Entered: 02/17/2023)

Feb. 17, 2023

Feb. 17, 2023

PACER
6

SUMMONS RETURNED EXECUTED: Sacramento County (Valerie Vallejo) served on 2/10/2023, answer due 3/3/2023. (Demas, Louis) Modified on 2/22/2023 (Benson, A.). (Entered: 02/17/2023)

Feb. 17, 2023

Feb. 17, 2023

PACER
7

STIPULATION to Extend Time to Respond to 1 Complaint by City of Sacramento, County of Sacramento. Attorney Pak, Grace Lee added. (Pak, Grace) Modified on 2/27/2023 (Perdue, C.). (Entered: 02/24/2023)

Feb. 24, 2023

Feb. 24, 2023

PACER
8

Stipulation and Proposed Order

March 20, 2023

March 20, 2023

PACER
9

Minute Order

March 21, 2023

March 21, 2023

PACER

~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings AND Minute Order

March 21, 2023

March 21, 2023

PACER
10

Stipulation

April 18, 2023

April 18, 2023

PACER
11

Amended Complaint

April 19, 2023

April 19, 2023

RECAP

Minute Order AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

May 16, 2023

May 16, 2023

PACER
14

Dismiss

June 2, 2023

June 2, 2023

PACER
15

Dismiss

June 2, 2023

June 2, 2023

PACER

Minute Order AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

June 5, 2023

June 5, 2023

PACER

Minute Order

June 12, 2023

June 12, 2023

PACER
19

Opposition to Motion

June 30, 2023

June 30, 2023

PACER
20

Opposition to Motion

June 30, 2023

June 30, 2023

PACER
24

Notice of Change of Address

July 27, 2023

July 27, 2023

PACER

Minute Order AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings AND ~Util - Set/Reset Motion Hearing

July 28, 2023

July 28, 2023

PACER

Motion Hearing AND Scheduling Conference AND ~Util - 1 Set/Reset Deadlines and Hearings

Aug. 11, 2023

Aug. 11, 2023

PACER
27

ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 10/05/23 GRANTING IN PART 14 & 15 Motions to dismiss and DISMISSES McNabb, Haley and Barstow's claims against the County and Hood and Barstow's claims against the City with le ave to amend. The court also DISMISSES plaintiffs' state claims without prejudice to refiling in state court. The court STRICKES paragraphs 80 to 82 from the complaint. Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint, to the extent possible within the confines of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11, within 21 days from the date of this order.(Licea Chavez, V)

Oct. 6, 2023

Oct. 6, 2023

RECAP
28

Amended Complaint

Oct. 23, 2023

Oct. 23, 2023

PACER
30

Answer to Complaint

Nov. 6, 2023

Nov. 6, 2023

PACER
31

Answer to Complaint

Nov. 6, 2023

Nov. 6, 2023

PACER
32

Notice of Appearance

Nov. 7, 2023

Nov. 7, 2023

PACER

Case Details

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Disability Rights

Key Dates

Filing Date: Feb. 7, 2023

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

All Sacramento residents with mobility disabilities who have used, use, or will use, the sidewalks in the defendant city, and defendant county, through the date of judgment in this action.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Pending

Defendants

Sacramento (Sacramento), City

Sacramento (Sacramento), County

Defendant Type(s):

Jurisdiction-wide

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701

State law

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: None Yet / None

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General:

Access to public accommodations - governmental

Poverty/homelessness

Disability and Disability Rights:

Sidewalks

Mobility impairment

Discrimination-area:

Disparate Impact

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)