multiple claims

[hungryt]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? CA

I need to know what constitutes splitting a case, and how to determine when it is valid to file a second one against the same party for the same time period. Even though mine is a small claims case, I understand that the criteria are the same as in other civil cases. I have denials of two different reasonable accommodation requests and violations of three different reasonable accommodation agreements that they want me to combine into one claim.

 

[jesuslambrecht]

Why don't you ask for legal adviser or lawyer who can provide you the suggestion and solve your issue.

 

[Userunknown2015]

I don't understand your answer. So in other words no one should visit this site and ask questions because they should consult legal aid or a lawyer?

 

[hungryt]

I have to say that I second Userunknown2015's response. To expand further, I would have thought it should be kind of obvious that I came here to ask the Q because those resources failed to provide the answer to me. Otherwise I would not have needed to ask it here. Most of the time the people who take those calls only have limited knowledge of basic info for someone who needs to find out how to file a claim. When it comes to Q's that require more detail, they are as lost as the person asking it.

Yesterday I finally got my first clue to an actual answer from the judge at the hearing for my case. He said that all of those Unruh violations are considered to be part of the rental contract, and as such have to be included together. I don't entirely agree with that because two of those agreements were made independently from that contract and at later times, creating separate contracts as an accommodation for a disability.

Also, the requests that were denied would never be written into a rental agreement because they are normally expected to be common rights under the law for all tenants, such as having access to the premises where you live. This would include additional accommodations that may be necessary for a person who winds up in a wheelchair after the fact.

So now I have at least partially provided an answer to my own Q, along with a rebuttal to that answer. I'm hoping that this won't be the normal way that this site works. I'm looking for more insight and commentary from other people. Otherwise what's the point?

 

[tranquility]

I have to say that I second Userunknown2015's response. To expand further, I would have thought it should be kind of obvious that I came here to ask the Q because those resources failed to provide the answer to me. Otherwise I would not have needed to ask it here. Most of the time the people who take those calls only have limited knowledge of basic info for someone who needs to find out how to file a claim. When it comes to Q's that require more detail, they are as lost as the person asking it.

Yesterday I finally got my first clue to an actual answer from the judge at the hearing for my case. He said that all of those Unruh violations are considered to be part of the rental contract, and as such have to be included together. I don't entirely agree with that because two of those agreements were made independently from that contract and at later times, creating separate contracts as an accommodation for a disability.

Also, the requests that were denied would never be written into a rental agreement because they are normally expected to be common rights under the law for all tenants, such as having access to the premises where you live. This would include additional accommodations that may be necessary for a person who winds up in a wheelchair after the fact.

So now I have at least partially provided an answer to my own Q, along with a rebuttal to that answer. I'm hoping that this won't be the normal way that this site works. I'm looking for more insight and commentary from other people. Otherwise what's the point?

I don't think you're going to be happy here. Your original post left too many facts out to have anyone competent attempt an answer to your specific question. Many times an original poster wants an answer to a specific question that comes far later then many, many legal issues that should better be asked. You believe you are competent and know and have handled all those many, many legal issues and yet you ask a basic question. To that question, seek information on compulsory joinder. Black letter law has to do with having to join all things that are related to the same transaction or occurrence. More cannot be given to you as there are missing facts. I understand you want to make some small claims $50k case out of something that realistically, because of your choice of forum, is $10K at most. But that is answering your question without enough facts.

While not asked, you might look to the limitations described in http://www.disabilityrightsca.org/pubs/520601.pdf .