Gunther v. Lin

How courts have described this case

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

• noting the absence of any mention of the Harris intentional discrimination issue in the bill’s legislative history
• relying on Harris to conclude that a plaintiff must prove intent for a damages claim, but not for injunctive relief, under the Unruh Act
• noting the absence of any mention of the Harris intentional discrimination issue in the bill’s legisla- tive history
• rejecting Gunther where Unruh claim depended on violations of the ADA
• “There is . . . no question that defendant Lin never intended to violate the ADA.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).