Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Schultz v. San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District
Citation: 240 F. App'x 766Docket: No. 05-16487
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; July 18, 2007; Federal Appellate Court
Beverly Schultz appeals the summary judgment favoring Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BARTD) and the associated award of attorney's fees and costs. The appellate court affirms the lower court's decisions. Key points include: 1. No competent evidence exists to challenge BARTD's design immunity regarding the alleged deficiencies by Schultz. She does not contest this immunity on appeal, and any materials she submits lack proper court consideration. 2. Schultz failed to demonstrate that changing conditions affected the original design or increased danger. BARTD's trains are equipped with safety features, negating any claims of failure to warn. 3. Schultz's argument regarding the consideration of California Civil Code § 2100 is insufficient to raise an appealable issue. 4. Her claims regarding denied discovery lack specifics on how they impacted her ability to oppose summary judgment. 5. Schultz's request for the presiding judge's recusal is deemed untimely and unsupported by adequate justification. 6. The appeal concerning attorney's fees awarded under the Americans with Disabilities Act is also untimely, as it was filed well after the order date. 7. Even if timely, challenges to the district court's discretion regarding bad faith in an affidavit fail. The court did not evaluate sanctions under various legal provisions since no additional fees were granted. The court affirms the lower court's rulings and denies Schultz's request for judicial notice. This decision is not for publication and does not set a precedent.