Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC

UNITED AFRICAN-ASIAN ABILITIES CLUB v. KINGS PLACE PROPERTY LLC

Filed February 24, 2020

Plaintiff

  • Name: United African-Asian Abilities Club
  • Filing date: February 24, 2020
  • State of filing: California

Defendant

Case Summary

On February 24, 2020, United African-Asian Abilities Club filed a Complaint in California Federal court against Kings Place Property LLC. Plaintiff United African-Asian Abilities Club alleges that The business has no specific website but advertises and lists on a number of website including apartmentguide.com, apartmenthomeliving.com, apartmentratings.com, zumper.com, yelp.com, zillow.com. is not accessible.

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

User could not determine from website content whether Defendants’ rental office and common areas were physically accessible to person with disabilities.

Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:

  • Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. 

  • Claims under California Accessibility Laws
  • Fair Housing Act

Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

  • All named Plaintiffs seeks injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3613(c) and 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a). Only the named Individual Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief pursuant to CA Civil Code §52. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3613(c), all Plaintiffs request this court to enjoin Defendants to cease their discriminatory practices in housing rental services, rental housing management services, and for Defendants to implement written policies and methods to respond to reasonable accommodation and reasonable modification requests. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a), Plaintiffs request this Court enjoin Defendants to remove all barriers to equal access to the disabled Plaintiffs in, at, or on their facilities, including but not limited to architectural and communicative barriers in the provision of Defendants’ rental services. Plaintiffs do not seek injunctive relief pursuant to Cal. Civil Code §55 and Plaintiffs do not seek attorneys’ fees pursuant to Cal. Civil Code §55. Plaintiffs do not seek any relief at all pursuant to Cal. Civil Code §55.
  • All named Plaintiffs seek actual damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3613(c). However, Plaintiff Club only seeks damages for itself. Plaintiff Club does not seek damages on behalf of its members;
  • Only the named Individual Plaintiff seeks recovery of actual damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code §§ 52 or 54.3;
  • Only the named Individual Plaintiff seeks $4,000 in minimum statutory damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 52 for each and every offense of Civil Code § 51, pursuant to Munson v. Del Taco, (June 2009) 46 Cal. 4th 661;
  • In the alternative to the damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 52 in Paragraph C above, only the named individual Plaintiff seeks $1,000 in minimum statutory damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 54.3 for each and every offense of Civil Code § 54.1;
  • All named Plaintiffs seek attorneys' fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 3613(c)(2), 42 U.S.C. § 12205, and Cal. Civil Code §§ 52, 54.3;
  • Only the named individual Plaintiff seeks treble damages pursuant to Cal. Civil Code §§ 52(a) or 54.3(a);
  • The named Plaintiffs are seeking perspective injunctive relief to require the Defendants to provide obvious reasonable accommodations, to provide the required auxiliary aids and to modify Defendants’ procedures, practices, and policies of the Defendants in the provision of Defendants’ rental services. Without perspective relief the Plaintiffs will suffer future harm.
  • All named Plaintiffs seek a Jury Trial and;
  • For such other further relief as the court deems proper.

CaliforniaReal Estate