Legal Opinion
Castaneda v. Burger King Corp.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided February 18, 2009No. C 08-04262 WHAPublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS; DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR A STAY OF CERTAIN DISCOVERY; PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL REMOVAL OF CONFIDENTIAL DESIGNATION
WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
In this disability-rights action, plaintiff Miguel Castaneda sued on behalf of himself and others similarly situated for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as state law. Plaintiff alleges access violations at a subset of Burger King’s restaurants in California: those that Burger King leases to or from other entities. Well before the Rule 23 stage, defendants move to dismiss…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- City of Los Angeles v. LyonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Charles H. CAHILL; Aniko Der Cahill, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO., Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Parks School of Business, Inc., Dba Parks College, a New Mexico Corporation v. Fife Symington Roy A. Nicholson Sally HeinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Equal Rights Center v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 2011
- Griffin v. Cedar Fair, L.P.District Court, N.D. California · 2011
- Flaum v. Gloucester Lanes, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2014
- C.W. v. Nevada Department of EducationDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2025
- Marlen Mesutovich Izzetov v. Tesla Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2020
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.