Group Photo

The Premiere ADA Lawsuit Defense, Business, and Real Estate Attorneys

Website ADA – California Court holds “No Place No Case”

| Dec 31, 2019 | ADA |

California State Court Follows “No Place No Case” Doctrine.  In Thurston v. Midvale Corp., 39 Cal. App. 5th 634, 640-41 (Sep 3, 2019) , the Court closely followed 9th circut Federal Case, Robles vs Domino’s Pizza.  On the one hand, the Court allowed an ADA website case to go forward, but it also stated that the main reason for doing so, just as in the Robles case, was because there was a likely nexus between the website and the defendant’s physical store, stongly suggesting that without the nexus to a physical location where customers can obtain goods or services, there would be no ADA case.  This is what the Karlin Law Firm has called the “No Place – No Case” doctrine, or for short the Karlin Wesite Doctrine.  Good news for websites which have customers in California.

For example, individuals may find that its harder to sleep if a bedroom is located on the same floor as a living room. Generally speaking, it isn’t possible to build up when adding more space to a ranch. Therefore, adding to the inside of the home may mean taking away outdoor space. It is also difficult for those who plan to live in such a property to use as an owner-occupied rental since they often don’t have basements.

Individuals who are seeking to purchase a residential property are encouraged to learn as much about it as possible. An attorney may be able to determine if there are any issues with the title to the property or if there are any problems that weren’t disclosed by the current homeowner. This might make it easier for a buyer to confidently close on a transaction that will impact his or her life for years.