Goodwin Ex Rel. Estate of Lunnin v. C.N.J., Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding restitution is not an available remedy under Title III because it is a \retrospective remedy\
• holding that a request for “equitable relief in the form of an order directing the defendants to provide the plaintiff with future installation work under reasonable terms” was moot since the deceased plaintiff and his estate “cannot conceivably benefit from such an order”
• finding that plaintiff who stated explicitly that his claims arose under Titles I and III of the ADA did not properly plead a retaliation claim under Title V
• claim for damages “survive[d] [plaintiffs] death and Article Ill’s ‘case or controversy’ element” where “personal representative * * * successfully moved for substitution as party plaintiff’
• “A finding of mootness with respect to a prayer for injunctive relief does not automatically render a companion claim for monetary damages moot.”
• “money damages are not an option for private parties suing under Title III of the ADA.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).