WHITE v. SQUARE INC (2019)

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiff Robert E. White appeals the district court’s dismissal of his claim under California’s Unruh Act based on lack of statutory standing. According to White’s complaint, White visited Square’s website intending to use its services, encountered terms and conditions that allegedly denied him equal access to its services, and then left the website without entering into an agreement with Square. See White v. Square, Inc., 891 F.3d 1174, 1175-1176 (9th Cir. 2018). The district court held that White lacked standing under the Unruh Act, and White appealed. Because California law in this area was unsettled, we certified a question respecting this issue to the California Supreme Court, see White v. Square, Inc., 891 F.3d 1174 , which subsequently responded, see White v. Square, Inc., 7 Cal.5th 1019, 250 Cal.Rptr.3d 770, 446 P.3d 276 (2019).

Applying the California Supreme Court’s ruling, the district court erred in concluding that White lacked statutory standing. White sufficiently alleged that he “visited the business’s website, encountered discriminatory terms, and intended to make use of the business’s services.” See White v. Square, Inc., 250 Cal.Rptr.3d 770, 446 P.3d at 283. Accordingly, White has standing to pursue his Unruh Act claim. Id.

REVERSED and REMANDED