Erik Estavillo v. Dave Cortese; Country Club Villa Apartments
March 16, 2026·5:23-cv-04032-VKD·Unpublished·By Aisha Johnson
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court dismissal of an Americans with Disabilities Act claim because the plaintiff was no longer a resident of the facility. The court held that the request for injunctive relief was moot since the plaintiff conceded he had moved.
Erik Estavillo appealed pro se from a district court judgment dismissing his action alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case originated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California before Magistrate Judge Virginia Kay DeMarchi.
The court’s reasoning
The panel reviewed the dismissal de novo and concluded the case was moot. The court found that Estavillo conceded he had moved and was no longer a resident of the defendants’ facility. Under Ninth Circuit precedent, a request for injunctive relief remains live only so long as there is some present harm left to enjoin. The court also rejected Estavillo’s contentions that the district court was biased against him as unsupported by the record.
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces that plaintiffs seeking injunctive relief under Title III must demonstrate a continuing violation or present harm, as moving away from the facility eliminates the basis for such relief.
