Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Albert Dytch v. Yohanes Gebreab

January 20, 2011

ALBERT DYTCH,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
YOHANES GEBREAB, ZEMAM
SF GEBREAB AND GEORGE KIFLE, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Edward M. Chen E R U.S. Magistrate Judge

THOMAS N. STEWART, III - #88128 ATTORNEY AT LAW 369 BLUE OAK LANE, 2nd FLOOR CLAYTON, CA 94517 TELEPHONE (925) 672-8452 TELEFAX (925) 673-1729 Attorneys for Albert Dytch

UPDATED JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT ODRER RESETTING CMC January 26, 2011 2:00 p.m. Courtroom C; 15th Floor;

The parties to the above-entitled action jointly submit this Updated Case Management Statement:

Update

The attorneys met on site on November 29, 2010, and worked out a tentative list of modifications to the Restaurant. On that date, a revised draft Settlement Agreement was provided by Plaintiff's counsel to Defendant's counsel.

Defendant has not responded to the revised draft Settlement Agreement. On December 7, 2010, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Need for Mediation.

Joel Franciosa was appointed as the Mediator. On January 14, 2011 a Mediation teleconference was held. Mediation was set for March 8, 2011. The Parties were encouraged to discuss settlement in the mean time.

1. Jurisdiction and Service:

Jurisdiction: This Court has jurisdiction of this action pursuant to 28 USC § 1331 for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 USC 12101 et seq. Pursuant to supplemental jurisdiction, attendant and related causes of action arising from the same facts are also brought under California law, including but not limited to violations of California Civil Code §§ 54, 54.1 and 55. Venue: Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 USC 1391(b) and is founded on the fact that the location where Plaintiff experienced discrimination is located in this district and that Plaintiff's causes of action arose in this district. No issues exist regarding personal jurisdiction.

All defendants have been served, and will have Answered by the Conference date.

2. Facts:

This is a disability access case brought pursuant to the ADA and California law. Plaintiff alleges that he is disabled. Defendant owns the real property in Oakland where a Restaurant is operated. Plaintiff alleges that on March 12, 2010, he patronized the Restaurant and encountered barriers to the disabled. Plaintiff seeks an injunction, damages and attorneys' fees.

3. Legal Issues:

Whether the business has barriers which are readily achievable to remove; whether the business is in violation of ADAAG or California's Title 24 because of the date of original construction and alterations (if any); the nature and extent of any damages (if any) suffered by Plaintiff and; whether Plaintiff is entitled to, and the reasonable amount of, Plaintiff's attorneys' fees and costs.

4. Motions:

No Motions have been made or are pending. No Motions are currently anticipated.

5. Amendment of Pleadings:

No amendments to the pleadings are currently anticipated.

6. Evidence Preservation:

No steps have been taken to preserve any paper or electronic evidence. No such steps are thought to be needed.

7. Disclosures:

The parties will make their Initial Disclosures by March 1, 2011

8. Discovery:

Discovery taken to date is as ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.