The Ohio House, LLC v. City of Costa Mesa, 135 F.4th 645 (2024)

Citation: The Ohio House, LLC v. City of Costa Mesa, 135 F.4th 645 (2024)
Parent Document: The Ohio House, LLC v. City of Costa Mesa, 135 F.4th 645 (2024)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 2024-12-04
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10287865/the-ohio-house-llc-v-city-of-c... ↗

Full Text

907 chars

conference order, the district court correctly characterized Ohio House’s
“pattern or practice” theory as a “disparate treatment claim.” By bringing
allegations of a pattern and practice of discrimination, plaintiffs are
effectively pursuing the “‘direct or circumstantial evidence’
approach. . . of [showing that] the defendant’s actions were motivated by
discriminatory intent[,]” Pac. Shores Props., 730 F.3d at 1158, to which
we apply the Arlington Heights test, id. at 1158–59. Ohio House does
not provide a discernible legal framework for reviewing its claim, much
less analyze the Arlington Heights factors. Regardless, because Ohio
House relies on the same unconvincing evidence of alleged
discriminatory intent used to support its interference claim, its disparate-
treatment claim based on a pattern or practice theory fails as well.
          THE OHIO HOUSE, LLC V. CITY OF COSTA MESA         43

Other Sections in This Document (107)

Full Text