(PS) Hipp v. The City of Vallejo
2:25-cv-01806
| E.D. Cal. | Jun 28, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs are four unhoused individuals with disabilities, residing in parking areas near Vallejo City Hall, Library, and Ferry Terminal.
- The City of Vallejo posted a 5-day eviction notice, and Plaintiffs allege city officials stated ADA accommodation requests would not be honored.
- Several Plaintiffs submitted requests for reasonable accommodations under the ADA, but were not granted accommodations or contacted by the City.
- The City postponed evictions, acknowledging on its website the need to engage with ADA accommodation requests, but later rescheduled evictions for June 30, 2025.
- Plaintiffs filed suit alleging violations of the ADA and Fourteenth Amendment, and sought a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to halt evictions.
- The Court was asked to decide whether to grant the TRO pending a hearing on a preliminary injunction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| TRO Standard/Irreparable Harm | Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm if evicted | No urgent necessity for immediate eviction | Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm |
| ADA Reasonable Accommodation | City failed to provide/engage re: accommodation requests | City claimed continued outreach, but took no specific action | Serious questions exist on ADA violations |
| Balance of Hardships | Eviction creates substantial hardship for Plaintiffs | City faces no significant hardship from a brief delay | Balance tips heavily in Plaintiffs' favor |
| Public Interest | Public has an interest in ADA enforcement, due process | Not addressed specifically | Public interest favors granting TRO |
Key Cases Cited
- Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Bhd. of Teamsters, 415 U.S. 423 (purpose of TRO is to preserve status quo and prevent irreparable harm)
- Winter v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 555 U.S. 7 (sets the four-factor test for injunctive relief)
- Stuhlbarg Int’l Sales Co. v. John D. Brush & Co., 240 F.3d 832 (TRO and preliminary injunction analyses are substantially identical)
- Park Village Apartment Tenants Ass’n v. Mortimer Howard Trust, 636 F.3d 1150 (eviction can constitute irreparable harm)
- Associated Gen. Contractors of Cal., Inc. v. Coal. of Econ. Equity, 950 F.2d 1401 (constitutional violations may constitute irreparable harm)
- McGary v. City of Portland, 386 F.3d 1259 (public entities must make reasonable ADA accommodations, unless a fundamental alteration would result)
- Enyart v. Nat’l Conf. of Bar Examiners, 630 F.3d 1153 (public interest in enforcement of ADA)