Goldup v. The City of San Diego
3:24-cv-01764
S.D. Cal.Apr 14, 2025Background
- Plaintiff, Garrett Michael Goldup, alleged disability discrimination by the City of San Diego after being denied entry to library branches with his service dog on three occasions.
- Plaintiff previously filed and lost a similar claim in San Diego Superior Court (small claims) and subsequently in a federal court action, both based on the same incidents.
- The current lawsuit, filed pro se, again alleged violations of federal and California disability rights statutes, seeking damages for the same conduct.
- Defendant, City of San Diego, moved to dismiss, arguing the claims were barred by res judicata due to the prior state judgment.
- The court allowed supplemental briefing and considered Plaintiff's various post-deadline motions but found none changed the outcome.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether res judicata bars relitigation of the claim | State court did not address merits; jurisdictional defect | All elements of res judicata met; case fully litigated | Barred by res judicata |
| Whether claims are identical under California law | Not identical; new legal theories asserted | Same events, parties, and right at issue | Claims are identical |
| Whether small claims judgment was a decision on merits | No merits adjudication in small claims court | Judgment after trial = final, merits-based decision | Judgment was on the merits |
| Whether leave to amend should be granted | Amendments would address res judicata issues | Amendment is futile under res judicata | Leave to amend denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (Rule 12(b)(6) standards for plausibility of pleadings)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (standard for pleading sufficient facts for relief under Rule 8)
- Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co., 28 Cal. 4th 888 (California claim preclusion/primary right theory)
- Boeken v. Philip Morris USA, Inc., 48 Cal. 4th 788 (elements for claim preclusion in California)
- Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 80 F.3d 336 (pleading standards and accepting facts as true at motion to dismiss)
- Crowley v. Katleman, 8 Cal. 4th 666 (defining primary right theory under California law)