Sepulveda v. Gaber

Background

Richard Sepulveda alleged that he was disabled, used a walker, and encountered access barriers at N&M Market in Oakland, California. He alleged that the market's counter and some aisles interfered with his access. He brought claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and California state law against Deffaa Hizam Gaber, alleged to own and operate the market, and Anna Mah and Mark K. Mah, alleged to own the property where the market was located.

After the case was filed, Sepulveda, Gaber, and the Mahs signed a written settlement agreement. The agreement stated that the defendants had complied, or would comply by July 7, 2024, with disability laws concerning the counter and aisles. It also required payment of $10,000 to Sepulveda within 15 days after the agreement was fully signed, and required Sepulveda to dismiss the case with prejudice after receiving that payment. Sepulveda said he received $3,000 but not the remaining $7,000.

Motion to Enforce the Settlement

Sepulveda moved to enforce the agreement, seeking the outstanding $7,000, an order requiring compliance with the accessibility provision, and attorney's fees. The court stated that a district court may summarily enforce a settlement agreement in a case pending before it. The court found no dispute that the parties named in the complaint had signed the agreement and found no equitable reason not to enforce it. The court also found reasonable the two hours of attorney time and the requested hourly rate of $375.

Before entering judgment, however, the court had to determine whether it had personal jurisdiction over each defendant. That required proper service of the summons and complaint, or proof that an unserved defendant had consented to the court's authority or waived the lack of service.

Ruling

The court granted the motion to enforce the settlement agreement against Gaber. It entered judgment against Gaber for $7,000, awarded $700 in attorney's fees, and set the total amount at $7,700. The court also ordered Gaber, if he had not already done so, to comply by July 7, 2024, with applicable disability laws concerning the counter and aisles.

The court denied the motion to enforce the agreement against Anna Mah and Mark K. Mah. The record showed that Sepulveda had not asked the clerk to issue summonses for them and had not shown that they were served, waived service, or consented to the court's authority. The court therefore lacked power to enter judgment against them. It declined to extend the service deadline again and dismissed without prejudice Sepulveda's claims against the Mahs.