Housing And Civil Enforcement Cases Documents

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

           Plaintiff,

                                                                                                      CIVIL ACTION NO.

BRIGGS OF SAN ANTONIO, INC.
d/b/a FAT TUESDAY

           Defendant.

______________________________)

The United States of America alleges that:

1. This action is brought by the Attorney General on behalf of the United States to enforce Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the Public Accommodations Act), 42 U.S.C. § 2000a, et seq.
Jurisdiction
2. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000a(a) and § 2000a-5(a) and 28 U.S.C. 1345.
3. Venue is proper in the Western District of Texas because the claims alleged here arose in this District and the Defendants do business here.
   Parties
4. Defendant Briggs of San Antonio, Inc., is a Louisiana corporation. Defendant Briggs of San Antonio, Inc., operates in the Western District of Texas (San Antonio, Texas).
5. Fat Tuesday is a restaurant and bar located in San Antonio, Texas.
6. Fat Tuesday is a place of public accommodation within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000a(b)(2) and (b)(3).
7. The operation of Fat Tuesday affects commerce within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 2000a(c)(2) and (c)(3).
Title II Violations
8. Defendant, through its own actions, or the actions of its employees or agents, have implemented a policy and practice of denying to non-white individuals, on account of these individuals' race, color and/or national origin, including but not limited to black, Hispanic and Filipino, the full and equal enjoyment of Defendants' goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations, on the same basis as they make them available to white persons. Defendant and its agents have carried out this policy and practice by, among other things, implementing terms and conditions for service of non-white persons, such as the requirement of prepayment, that are less favorable than the terms and conditions for service of white persons.
9. The conduct of Defendant described in Paragraph 8 constitutes a pattern or practice of resistance to the full and equal enjoyment by non-white individuals, including but not limited to blacks, Hispanics and Filipinos, on account of these individuals' race, color and/or national origin, of rights secured by 42 U.S.C. § 2000a, et seq., and the pattern or practice is of such a nature and is intended to deny the full exercise of such rights. Unless restrained by Order of this Court, Defendant will continue to refuse to provide these non-white individuals with the full and equal enjoyment of rights secured to them by 42 U.S.C. § 2000a, et seq.

WHEREFORE, the United States requests that the Court enter an Order:

1. Declaring that the discriminatory practices and policies of the Defendant violate Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000a, et seq.;
2. Enjoining Defendant, its employees, agents, and successors, and all other persons in active concert or participation with Defendant, from engaging in any act or practice which, on the basis of race, color and/or national origin, denies or abridges any rights secured by Title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000a, et seq.;
3. Requiring Defendant, its employees, agents, and successors, and all other persons in active concert or participation with any of them, to take such affirmative steps as may be necessary to remedy the past unlawful conduct.

The United States further prays for such additional relief as the interests of justice may require, together with the costs and disbursement of this action.