603 F. App'x 595
9th Cir.2015Background
- Plaintiff Robert Segalman sued Southwest Airlines after airline handling allegedly left his electronic wheelchair without power and with broken components and a severed seatbelt.
- He brought claims under the ADA, California statutes prohibiting disability discrimination (Unruh Act and Disabled Persons Act), and state-law negligence.
- The district court dismissed all claims under Rule 12(b)(6); Segalman appealed.
- After the district court’s judgment, this court decided Gilstrap v. United Air Lines, which addressed whether airport terminals are public accommodations under the ADA and the preemptive effect of federal ACAA regulations.
- The panel reviewed de novo and applied Gilstrap to determine (1) whether the ADA claim survives, and (2) whether ACAA regulations preempt Segalman’s state-law claims or whether state remedies remain.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether airport-terminal conduct is covered by the ADA as a "place of public accommodation" | Segalman argued ADA covers airline services at airports | Southwest argued terminals are not ADA public accommodations for airline service claims | Court: ADA claim foreclosed by Gilstrap; affirm dismissal |
| Whether ACAA federal regulations preempt state-law standards of care/discrimination for airline wheelchair handling | Segalman argued state-law claims for negligence and disability discrimination can proceed | Southwest argued pervasive ACAA regs govern and preempt state standards | Court: ACAA regs are pervasive re: wheelchair handling and preempt state standards of care; preemption affirmed |
| Whether California statutes and negligence remedies remain available when federal regs set the standard of care | Segalman sought state statutory and common-law remedies for alleged violations | Southwest urged dismissal due to preemption of state standards | Court: Left open — district court must decide whether state statutes and negligence remedies survive as remedies when federal regs govern; dismissal vacated and remanded |
| Whether ACAA provides an implied private right of action | Segalman argued for an implied ACAA cause of action | Southwest disputed existence; district court note that Segalman did not plead ACAA claim | Court: Did not reach implied-right question because complaint did not allege ACAA cause of action; remand only for state-remedy issues |
Key Cases Cited
- Narayanan v. British Airways, 747 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2014) (standard of review for Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal)
- Gilstrap v. United Air Lines, 709 F.3d 995 (9th Cir. 2013) (airport terminals not ADA "places of public accommodation"; pervasive ACAA regs preempt state standards of care but not state remedies)
- In re Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., 754 F.3d 772 (9th Cir. 2014) (arguments not raised in district court generally forfeited on appeal)