Code Details

Civil Code – CIV
DIVISION 1. PERSONS [38 – 86] ( Heading of Division 1 amended by Stats. 1988, Ch. 160, Sec. 12. )
PART 2.5. BLIND AND OTHER PHYSICALLY DISABLED PERSONS [54 – 55.32] ( Part 2.5 added by Stats. 1968, Ch. 461. )

Exact Statute Text

Any person who is aggrieved or potentially aggrieved by a violation of Section 54 or 54.1 of this code, Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 4450) of Division 5 of Title 1 of the Government Code, or Part 5.5 (commencing with Section 19955) of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code may bring an action to enjoin the violation. The prevailing party in the action shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees.

(Added by Stats. 1974, Ch. 1443.)

Civil Code § 55 Summary

Civil Code § 55 grants individuals who are “aggrieved or potentially aggrieved” by violations of California’s disability access laws the right to take legal action. Specifically, it allows a person to file a lawsuit to “enjoin” (stop or prevent) violations of Civil Code Sections 54 or 54.1, as well as certain accessibility requirements found in the Government Code and Health and Safety Code. A key feature of this statute is that the party who wins the lawsuit (“prevailing party”) is entitled to recover their reasonable attorney’s fees from the losing party. This provision helps ensure that individuals seeking to enforce disability access rights are not deterred by the potential cost of litigation.

Purpose of Civil Code § 55

The legislative purpose behind Civil Code § 55 is to provide a crucial enforcement mechanism for California’s comprehensive disability access laws. While other statutes (like Civil Code §§ 54 and 54.1) establish the rights of individuals with disabilities to equal access, Section 55 empowers those individuals to actively ensure these rights are upheld.

Before Section 55, the rights granted could be difficult to enforce without substantial personal cost. By allowing an aggrieved party to seek an injunction—a court order compelling a business or entity to correct an accessibility barrier—and, critically, by mandating the recovery of attorney’s fees for the prevailing party, the statute addresses several issues:

1. Ensuring Compliance: It provides a strong deterrent against non-compliance, encouraging businesses and public entities to proactively meet accessibility standards.
2. Facilitating Litigation: It removes a significant financial barrier for individuals with disabilities who might otherwise be unable to afford the legal costs associated with forcing compliance.
3. Preventing Ongoing Harm: An injunction can stop continuous or recurring violations, ensuring that inaccessible conditions are remedied promptly.

In essence, Civil Code § 55 transforms accessibility rights from mere declarations into actionable claims, fostering a more inclusive and accessible California.

Real-World Example of Civil Code § 55

Imagine Sarah, who uses a power wheelchair, visits a newly opened local bakery. She finds that while the entrance has a ramp, it’s too steep and lacks level landings, making it impossible for her to safely navigate. Inside, the aisles are too narrow for her wheelchair, and the only restroom is not accessible.

Sarah realizes these conditions violate California’s disability access standards, specifically Civil Code § 54.1 (equal access to public accommodations) and potentially the building standards referenced in the Government Code or Health and Safety Code. Feeling “aggrieved” by these barriers that deny her equal access, Sarah decides to take action.

Under Civil Code § 55, Sarah can file a lawsuit against the bakery owner. Her lawsuit would seek an injunction—a court order compelling the bakery to make the necessary modifications: fixing the ramp to meet code requirements, widening the aisles, and renovating the restroom to be accessible. If Sarah prevails in her action, the court would not only order the bakery to correct these violations but would also require the bakery owner to pay Sarah’s reasonable attorney’s fees, covering the cost of her legal representation. This ensures the bakery becomes accessible, and Sarah is not financially burdened for enforcing her rights.

Related Statutes

Civil Code § 55 does not operate in a vacuum; it is a critical enforcement tool for several other California statutes pertaining to disability access:

• Civil Code § 54 – Equal Access for Disabled Persons: This foundational statute establishes the fundamental right of blind, visually impaired, deaf, hard of hearing, and other physically disabled persons to the full and free use of public places, transportation, and facilities. Section 55 provides the mechanism to *enforce* these rights through injunctive relief.
• Civil Code § 54.1 – Access to Public Accommodations, Housing, etc.: This statute expands on Section 54, specifically granting equal access rights to housing, public conveyances, places of public accommodation (like hotels, restaurants, and shops), and other common facilities for various disabled persons. It also covers the right to use service animals. Like Section 54, its enforcement is empowered by Section 55.
• Civil Code § 54.3 – Remedies for Violations: This statute specifies the monetary damages available for violations of Sections 54, 54.1, or 54.2. A person denied equal access may recover actual damages and, in addition, up to treble (triple) actual damages, but in no case less than $4,000 for each offense. Importantly, Section 54.3 also allows for the recovery of attorney’s fees. Often, plaintiffs will combine a claim for injunctive relief under Section 55 with a claim for monetary damages under Section 54.3.
• Government Code Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 4450) of Division 5 of Title 1 – Accessibility of Public Buildings: This chapter mandates that all public buildings and facilities constructed with state, county, or municipal funds in California must be accessible to and usable by physically disabled persons. Section 55 allows for the injunctive enforcement of these specific governmental accessibility standards.
• Health and Safety Code Part 5.5 (commencing with Section 19955) of Division 13 – Building Standards for Accessibility: This part extends accessibility requirements to privately funded public accommodations and commercial buildings constructed in California, ensuring they also meet standards for disabled access. Section 55 serves as the enforcement mechanism for these privately funded building standards.
• Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civil Code §§ 51-53): While not explicitly listed in Civil Code § 55, the Unruh Act broadly prohibits discrimination based on various protected characteristics, including disability, in all business establishments in California. A violation of Civil Code § 54 or § 54.1 is also a violation of the Unruh Act. Furthermore, California law states that a violation of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) also constitutes a violation of the Unruh Act, providing another avenue for plaintiffs.

## Case Law Interpreting Civil Code § 55

• K.C. v. Richmond Unified School Dist., 11 Cal. 4th 203 (1995): This California Supreme Court case addressed the definition of a “prevailing party” under Civil Code § 55 for the purpose of awarding attorney’s fees. The court affirmed that a party who achieves their litigation objectives, even without a formal judgment after trial (e.g., through settlement or voluntary changes by the defendant), can be considered a prevailing party if their efforts were a catalyst for the desired outcome. This ruling is crucial for understanding when attorney’s fees are recoverable in disability access cases. [Link to Google Scholar page](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10928731320399120619&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr)
• Donald v. Cafe Royale, Inc., 218 Cal. App. 3d 168 (1990): This case involved a plaintiff seeking injunctive relief and damages under Civil Code sections 54, 54.1, and 55 after encountering an inaccessible restroom in a restaurant. The appellate court affirmed the plaintiff’s right to pursue injunctive relief and damages, underscoring the purpose of these statutes to ensure full and equal access for disabled individuals and the role of Section 55 in securing that access. [Link to Google Scholar page](https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8644783321453257850&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr)

Why Civil Code § 55 Matters in Personal Injury Litigation

While Civil Code § 55 does not directly address personal injury *damages*, it plays a profoundly important role in California personal injury litigation, particularly in premises liability cases involving individuals with disabilities. Its significance stems from several key aspects:

1. Establishing Duty and Breach (Negligence Per Se): A violation of an accessibility statute (like Civil Code §§ 54 or 54.1, or the related Government/Health and Safety Code provisions) for which § 55 provides enforcement can be strong evidence of negligence in a personal injury claim. If a property owner’s non-compliance with these statutory duties directly leads to an injury (e.g., an improperly built ramp causes a wheelchair user to fall, or an inaccessible bathroom causes an injury while attempting to navigate it), the plaintiff may argue “negligence per se.” This legal doctrine holds that a defendant’s violation of a statute creates a presumption of negligence, significantly strengthening the plaintiff’s case.
2. Forcing Remedial Action: In a personal injury case arising from an inaccessible condition, a plaintiff might not only seek monetary damages for their injuries but also want the dangerous condition corrected to prevent future harm to themselves or others. Civil Code § 55 provides the specific legal mechanism to obtain an injunction, forcing the property owner to fix the accessibility barrier. This is critical for improving public safety and accessibility beyond just compensating for an injury.
3. Attorney’s Fees as an Incentive: The “prevailing party” attorney’s fees provision of § 55 is a powerful tool. It means that if a disabled individual wins their lawsuit (or achieves a favorable settlement that forces compliance), the defendant may be ordered to pay the plaintiff’s legal costs. This can make it financially feasible for individuals to pursue these cases, even when the immediate personal injury damages might be limited, ensuring that justice is accessible to all.
4. Combining Claims: Personal injury attorneys often combine claims for damages under Civil Code § 54.3 (which provides for actual damages and a minimum of $4,000 for each violation of access rights) with an action for injunctive relief under Civil Code § 55. This dual approach allows plaintiffs to seek both compensation for their suffering and the mandated correction of the unlawful barrier.
5. Preventive Measure: For businesses and property owners, the existence and enforcement power of Civil Code § 55 underscore the critical importance of proactive compliance with disability access laws. Failure to do so not only exposes them to potential personal injury claims if an inaccessible condition causes harm but also to costly lawsuits specifically to force compliance, along with the plaintiff’s attorney’s fees.

In summary, Civil Code § 55 is a foundational statute that ensures California’s commitment to disability access is legally enforceable. For personal injury plaintiffs, it provides a means to rectify dangerous conditions and bolster negligence claims, while for defendants, it highlights the significant liabilities associated with non-compliance.