What is discrimination under the Unruh Civil Rights Act?

Useful Resources for Discrimination – Unruh Civil Rights Act

Recent Rulings on Discrimination – Unruh Civil Rights Act

MELINA CAMERON, ET AL. VS US BANCORP, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ET AL.

BACKGROUND Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) alleging the following causes of action: (1) negligence; (2) negligent hiring, retention, and supervision; (3) violation of Unruh Civil Rights Act; (4) discrimination in business dealings; and (5) violation of Ralph Act. Moving Defendant filed an unopposed demurrer to the FAC; however, the notice of motion does not specifically set forth the causes of action to which the demurrer is applicable.

  • Hearing

    Jan 15, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

JOSE ESTRADA VS HOME DEPOT U.S.A.,INC.A DELAWARE CORPORATION

ANALYSIS: Plaintiff Jose Estrada (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (“the Unruh Act”) against Defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Defendant”) on May 8, 2019. Defendant filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment or in the alternative, Summary Adjudication against Plaintiff on October 30, 2020. Plaintiff filed an opposition on December 30, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jan 13, 2021

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CHRISTIAN DUNGEY V. SANTA BARBARA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, ET AL.

Code § 66270); 2) gender violence (Civil Code § 52.4), 3) negligence, 4) intentional infliction of emotional distress, 5) battery, 6) violation of Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code § 51) (hereinafter the “Unruh Act”); and 7) violation of title 5 (CCR § 59300). SBCC’s motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication is scheduled for hearing on May 25 and trial is scheduled for July 13, 2021.

  • Hearing

    Jan 12, 2021

ALEXANDAR CVETKOVICH VS CROSS CREEK VILLAGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

With regard to the 5th cause of action for Discrimination in Violation of FEHA and Unruh Civil Rights Act, Defendants have failed to establish that the claim is time-barred as a matter of law. When read as a whole, the Second Amended Complaint alleges sufficient facts to support a claim that Plaintiff was discriminated against based on his national origin.

  • Hearing

    Jan 12, 2021

MARY VALANCE VS 148 SHERWOOD LLC, ET AL.

While not set forth in the notice, a review of the motion and Proposed FAC demonstrates Plaintiff seeks to remove the 3rd (breach of covenant and right to quiet enjoyment and possession of the property) cause of action and add an additional cause of action for sexual harassment in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act based on facts already alleged or provided in discovery responses, in addition to the following changes: (1) correct a date, (2) clarify facts provided in the complaint, and (3) modify the prayer

  • Hearing

    Jan 11, 2021

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

CHRISTOPHER MARTINEZ VS GOOD OEL INC.

SERVICE: [X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK [X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK [X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK OPPOSITION: None filed as of January 4, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None REPLY: None filed as of January 4, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None ANALYSIS: Background On November 20, 2019, Plaintiff Christopher Martinez (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act against Defendant Good OEL, Inc. (“Good OEL”).

  • Hearing

    Jan 06, 2021

BRIAN WHITAKER VS BOP FIGAT7TH LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

SERVICE: [X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC 3.1300) OK [X] Correct Address (CCP 1013, 1013a) OK [X] 75/80 Day Lapse (CCP 12c and 1005 (b)) OK OPPOSITION: Filed on October 1, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None REPLY: Filed on October 8, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None ANALYSIS: Background On April 24, 2019, Plaintiff Brian Whitaker (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act against Defendants BOP FIGAT7TH, LLC (“BOP”) and California Pizza Kitchen, Inc. (“CPK”).

  • Hearing

    Jan 05, 2021

CHRISTOPHER MARTINEZ VS TOKIO LOS ANGELES LLC, ET AL.

SERVICE: [X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK [X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK [X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK OPPOSITION: None filed as of December 31, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None REPLY: None filed as of December 31, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None ANALYSIS: Background On March 6, 2019, Plaintiff Christopher Martinez (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act against Defendants Tokio Los Angeles, LLC (“Tokio”) and Underrated Presents

  • Hearing

    Jan 05, 2021

ASTINE SULEIMANYAN VS UTLA DBA UNITED TEACHERS LOS ANGELES, A CALIFORNIA ORGANIZATION, ET AL.

Civil Code §§52.1, 52), (7) violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Cal. Civil Code §§51.9), (8) gender discrimination against UTLA only, (9) violation of the Ralph Act (Cal. Civil Code §§51.7, 52), (10) breach of employment contract against UTLA only. McNamara and Joseph (“Individual Defendants”) now demur to the fourth cause of action. Additionally, all defendants demur to the sixth, seventh, ninth and tenth causes of action. Plaintiff opposes the demurrer.

  • Hearing

    Jan 04, 2021

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

LISA DAVIDSON VS OFFICE DEPOT, INC.

SERVICE: [X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK [X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK [X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK OPPOSITION: Filed on December 18, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None REPLY: Filed on December 23, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None ANALYSIS: Background On January 27, 2020, Plaintiff Lisa Davidson (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act against Defendant Office Depot, Inc. (“Defendant”).

  • Hearing

    Jan 04, 2021

JANE NA DOE VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL.

Civil Code section 52, part of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, allows for a party to recover attorney’s fees in connection with certain claims for discrimination in public accommodations. Finally, Civil Code section 52.4 allows a person who has been subject to “gender violence” to bring a civil action and, further, permits a prevailing party to be awarded attorney’s fees.

  • Hearing

    Dec 31, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ANNE KAROLINY SANTOS DOWNING, ET AL. VS THEO SWERISSEN, ET AL.

Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges causes of action for (1) Violation of Unruh Civil Rights Act, (2) sexual harassment, (3)”gender violence/battery of Santos”, (4) sexual battery of Downing, (5) breach of fiduciary duty- constructive fraud, (6) [erroneously labeled seventh] tortious interference with contractual relations, (7) [erroneously labeled eighth] conversion, (8) [erroneously labeled ninth] intentional infliction of emotional distress, (9) [erroneously labeled tenth] negligent infliction of emotional distress

  • Hearing

    Dec 23, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

GOD VS 4106 ROSEWOOD CORPORATION

On October 3, 2019, Plaintiff commenced this action against Defendant 4106 Rosewood Corporation for (1) unfair business practice; (2) negligence; (3) hatred and discrimination under the Unruh Civil Rights Act; (4) wrongful eviction; and (5) emotional distress. On November 5, 2019, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint, asserting thirty-one affirmative defenses. On February 13, 2020, the Court overruled Plaintiff’s demurrer to Defendant’s answer. On July 12, 2020, Plaintiff died.

  • Hearing

    Dec 21, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

GOD VS 4106 ROSEWOOD CORPORATION

On October 3, 2019, Plaintiff commenced this action against Defendant 4106 Rosewood Corporation for (1) unfair business practice; (2) negligence; (3) hatred and discrimination under the Unruh Civil Rights Act; (4) wrongful eviction; and (5) emotional distress. On November 5, 2019, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint, asserting thirty-one affirmative defenses. On February 13, 2020, the Court overruled Plaintiff’s demurrer to Defendant’s answer. On July 12, 2020, Plaintiff died.

  • Hearing

    Dec 21, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

MARY BALSER ET AL VS INTERINS EXCHANGE OF THE AUTO CULB ET A

On September 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (FAC), alleging: (1) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (2) breach of insurance contract; (3) breach of promises made during the course of the claim; (4) fraud; (5) negligent misrepresentation; (6) violation of Pen Code section 484; (7) intentional interference with an insurance contract; (8) intentional infliction of emotional distress; (9) violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act; (10) breach of oral and implied contract

  • Hearing

    Dec 14, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JORGE FLORES VS CAGE FREE K9 CAMP

Trust (“Abrams”) for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act. Defendant Abrams filed an Answer and Cross-Complaint on March 24, 2020 and Defendant Cage Free filed its Answer on March 26, 2020. On May 20, 2020, Defendant Abrams filed the instant (1) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Form Interrogatories and for an Award of Attorney’s Fees and (2) Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Respond to Request for Production and for an Award of Attorney’s Fees (collectively, the “Motions”).

  • Hearing

    Dec 08, 2020

KATIANA RODRIGUEZ, ET AL. VS BACON HOUSING, INC., ET AL.

Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Causes of Action – FEHA Plaintiffs’ Sixth Cause of Action in the Complaint alleges discrimination in violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act and Government Code section 12955 (FEHA).

  • Hearing

    Dec 07, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

MARINO, ET AL. V. NOVO MISSION INC., ET AL.

Regardless of whether Civil Code Section 51.9 is part of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, it is inapplicable to this action. Accordingly, the court strikes Plaintiffs’ citation to Civil Code section 51.9 on page 17, ¶ 99, line 4.

  • Hearing

    Dec 04, 2020

JESSICA GONZALES VS SAN JOAQUIN JUVENILE DETENTION CENTER ET AL.

Between the time of this Court’s Order, and the filing of the Second Amended Complaint, the SAC expanded to ten causes of action, including three entirely new causes of action: 1) municipal liability-ratification under 42 USC § 1983; 2) Municipal Liability – Unconstitutional Custom or Policy under 42 USC § 1983; and 3) California Unruh Civil Rights Act (Cal.Civ. Code §§ 51-53).

  • Hearing

    Dec 02, 2020

  • Judge Jayne Lee
  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

JANE JB DOE VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, A CALIFORNIA LOCAL PUBLIC ENTITY, ET AL.

Civil Code section 52, part of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, allows for a party to recover attorney’s fees in connection with certain claims for discrimination in public accommodations. Finally, Civil Code section 52.4 allows a person who has been subject to “gender violence” to bring a civil action and, further, permits a prevailing party to be awarded attorney fees.

  • Hearing

    Nov 24, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

AIDA OGANESIAN, ET AL. VS CAH-2014-1 BORROWER, LLC, ET AL.

(a); (9) Violation of FEHA § 12955, subd. (a), Failure to Engage in Interactive Process; and (10) Violation of Civil Code § 51, the Unruh Civil Rights Act. PRESENTATION: Defendants filed all three motions on October 26, 2020, Plaintiffs filed oppositions to all motions on November 06, 2020, and Defendants filed replies to all motions on November 12, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

BEDFORD, ET AL. V. COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, ET AL.

[2] The complaint contained a second cause of action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act pursuant to Civil Code section 51, et seq. The trial court sustained the demurrer to that cause of action, and the appellate court affirmed. (Id. at p. 741.) The appellate court’s discussion is omitted as it is not relevant to the issue at hand.

  • Hearing

    Nov 17, 2020

JANE JG DOE VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, A CALIFORNIA LOCAL PUBLIC ENTITY, ET AL.

Civil Code section 52, part of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, allows for a party to recover attorney fees in connection with certain claims for discrimination in public accommodations. Finally, Civil Code section 52.4 allows a person who has been subject to “gender violence” to bring a civil action and, further, permits a prevailing party to be awarded attorney fees.

  • Hearing

    Nov 17, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JULIO MARTINEZ VS ELIGIO GONZALEZ, ET AL.

Based on the attorney fees provision in the Unruh Civil Rights Act, the statute under which this action was brought, Plaintiff is entitled to recover attorney fees for his successful appeal. (Civ. Code, § 52, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

    Nov 16, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

VEGA VS. MANOR CARE

Prayer ¶ 7, asserting injunctive relief under Unruh Civil Rights Act), under Health & Safety Code § 1430(b), plaintiff is also alleging a right to attorneys' fees and costs if she proves Manor Care committed the regulatory violations plaintiff alleges other than understaffing and misrepresentations regarding the quality of care.

  • Hearing

    Nov 13, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 27     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.