Judge Grants Caplan v. Bob’s Auto Glass Joint Stipulation to Dismiss

“All pending motions are denied as moot, all hearings are cancelled, and all deadlines are terminated. The clerk of the court is instructed to close this case,” District Court Judge, Robin Rosenberg, ordered in a Southern Florida courtroom yesterday when referring to the Caplan v. Bob’s Auto Glass lawsuit.

Earlier this week both plaintiff Howard Caplan and defendant Bob’s Auto Glass filed a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice in hopes of ending the lawsuit that began with Caplan’s complaint in January 2019. Judge Rosenberg has since ruled in favor of the stipulation and has closed the lawsuit. The lawsuit alleged the auto glass shop discriminated against persons with disabilities.

“All parties shall bear their own attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses other than those specified in a confidential settlement agreement and agree not to file any additional motions in this matter,” a portion of the joint stipulation reads.

The lawsuit began when Caplan filed a complaint against the auto glass shop alleging discrimination based on disability. According to Caplan, Bob’s Auto Glass “discriminated and continue to discriminate against him and others by denying access to enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and accommodations.” He also claimed he would suffer in the future due to the business being noncompliant with current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) regulations.

“Plaintiff [Caplan] shall suffer a future injury as he intends to return and enjoy the goods and/or services at the subject facility within the next six months. The subject facility is in close proximity to plaintiff’s residence and is in an area frequently travelled. Plaintiff will also return to monitor compliance with the ADA. However, plaintiff is precluded from doing so by the defendants’ [Bob’s Auto Glass] failure and refusal to provide people with disabilities with full and equal access to their facility. Therefore, plaintiff continues to suffer from discrimination and injury due to the architectural barriers, which are in violation of the ADA,” a portion of Caplan’s complaint reads.

Since the lawsuit began earlier this year the case has been referred to mediation, in addition to having extended time to mediate in an effort to settle outside of court, according to court documents. Following the last mediation extension both parties came together to file a joint stipulation to dismiss with prejudice, of which the court granted.

This entry was posted in glassBYTEs Original Story and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *