859 F. Supp. 2d 1039
N.D. Cal.2012Background
- Plaintiff Shawna Wilkins-Jones has lupus and arthritis with limited mobility, requiring accommodations.
- She was arrested Apr 13, 2007, and detained for six days at Santa Rita Jail, the only disability-accessible facility at the time.
- Plaintiff repeatedly notified jail staff of her disabilities and needs, but no adequate accommodations were provided.
- PHS/Corizon is a private contractor with the County to assess intake and provide medical care; its employees set disability policies and determine accommodations.
- Plaintiff suffered extended periods of standing, inaccessible facilities, and pain due to inadequate access and accommodations, triggering ADA, CDPA, and Unruh Act claims.
- The court previously granted summary judgment to the County; the FAC sues PHS/Corizon and its employees (Brown, Campos, Wilson) for ADA, CDPA, and Unruh Act claims; Defendants move to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Title II applies to a private contractor | Wilkins-Jones argues contractor actions are actionable under Title II. | Corizon is not a public entity; not a proper Title II defendant. | Title II does not apply to private contractors; dismissal with prejudice. |
| Whether Unruh Act claims survive separate from ADA | Unruh Act claim can proceed if ADA claim supports it; may be independent if intentional discrimination alleged. | Unruh Act claim inadequately pleaded intentional discrimination and not independently viable. | Unruh Act claim dismissed with prejudice to the extent dependent on Title II; independent Unruh Act claim dismissed without prejudice. |
| Whether CDPA applies to jail facilities and to the alleged denial of access | CDPA covers public accommodations within jails; denial of physical access alleged. | Jails are public facilities; CDPA applies; but need denial of access to a specific place. | CDPA claim permitted; jail facilities denial of access alleged supports claim. |
| Whether the FAC plausibly states a CDPA-based denial of access against PHS/Corizon | Defendants controlled inmates’ access and dictated accommodations; FDAlike claims present. | Plaintiff failed to allege denial to a specific place; insufficient linkage to PHS/Corizon. | CDPA claim survives; Defendants’ motion denied on this issue. |
Key Cases Cited
- Armstrong v. Schwarzenegger, 622 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2010) (contracting with private entities not always immune from ADA Title II liability)
- Jensen v. Lane County, 222 F.3d 570 (9th Cir. 2000) (private actors may be state actors for §1983 but not necessarily Title II instrumentality)
- Edison v. Douberly, 604 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2010) (private contractor not an “instrumentality” under Title II)
- Green v. City of New York, 465 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 2006) (instrumentality must be creature of state; contracting alone not enough)
- Munson v. Del Taco, Inc., 46 Cal.4th 661 (Cal. 2009) (Munson permits ADA to support Unruh Act damages without showing intentional discrimination)
- O’Connor v. Village Green Owners, Inc., 33 Cal.3d 795 (Cal. 1983) (broad interpretation of ‘business establishment’ includes many organizations)
- Koebke v. Bernardo Heights Country Club, 36 Cal.4th 824 (Cal. 2005) (requires intent for independent Unruh Act claim apart from ADA where applicable)