Hoewischer v. Cedar Bend Club, Inc.
877 F. Supp. 2d 1212
M.D. Fla.2012Background
- ADA suit against The Cedar Bend Club, Inc. for barriers to access at its premises; Plaintiff Hoewischer filed initial complaint Oct 21, 2011 seeking injunctive relief and attorney’s fees; amended complaint filed Feb 9, 2012; Defendant moved to dismiss Feb 23, 2012; Magistrate’s Report recommended denial of dismissal May 1, 2012; Court adopted Report and denied dismissal May 23, 2012; Defendant moved for reconsideration Jun 20, 2012 which the court granted to reconsider in light of objections.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing under Title III ADA | Hoewischer has injury in fact and plans to return | Plaintiff lacks standing due to numerous prior lawsuits and speculative future visits | Plaintiff has standing to sue |
| Injunctive relief viability under ADA | Injunctive relief appropriate to remove barriers | Relief should be limited or denied at this stage | Plaintiff states a claim for injunctive relief |
| Readily achievable removal of barriers | Barriers are readily achievable adjustments per DOJ guidance | Not yet proven barriers readily achievable to remove | Plaintiff pled facts supporting readily achievable removal |
| Consistency with other MD Fla decisions and credibility of pleading | Plaintiff’s pleadings credible and distinguishable from other cases | Decisions cited by Defendant are distinguishable or misconstrued | Court found no inconsistency with MD Fla decisions; substantial similarities acknowledged; credibility to be tested later |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (U.S. 1992) (standing requires injury, causation, redressability)
- Shotz v. Cates, 256 F.3d 1077 (11th Cir. 2001) (standing for injunctive relief requires future discrimination likelihood)
- Stalley ex rel. U.S. v. Orlando Reg’l Healthcare Sys. Inc., 524 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2008) (facial vs. factual 12(b)(1) attacks on jurisdiction; standing analysis)