Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 26, 2024

Gomez v. Kedo LLC

Judge
Lorna Schofield
Docket
1:24-cv-01556
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
9
ADA / DisabilityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Gomez v. Kedo LLC, Judge Schofield entered a final default judgment requiring accessibility repairs under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Who this affects

Alexander Gomez obtained a final default judgment requiring Kedo LLC and El Paso 116 Corp. to address the listed accessibility barriers at the restaurant property. The opinion does not state that the judgment awarded a specific amount of money.

What happened

Alexander Gomez sued Kedo LLC and El Paso 116 Corp. under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, alleging that a restaurant had numerous barriers for people with disabilities, including inaccessible entrances, routes, dining areas, and restrooms.

The defendants were served but did not answer, appear, or attend the court’s scheduled hearing. The court determined that Gomez’s allegations were legally sufficient and that it had authority to hear the case.

Judge Lorna Schofield entered a final default judgment requiring the defendants to apply for, obtain, and arrange removal and correction of the listed access barriers. The judgment also required Gomez to serve the defendants with the judgment and supporting papers; it addressed a possible future request for attorney’s fees and costs.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Gomez v. Kedo LLC · No. 1:24-cv-01556
Judge
Lorna Schofield
Date
Aug. 26, 2024

Background

Alexander Gomez brought an action against Kedo LLC and El Paso 116 Corp. concerning property at 237 E 116th St., New York, New York. The complaint alleged that the property was a restaurant owned by Kedo LLC and leased by El Paso 116 Corp., and that it contained barriers that violated Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaint alleged that Gomez has a spinal-cord injury at the T-12 level and uses a wheelchair.

The judgment listed alleged accessibility problems involving the entrance, accessible routes and exits, ramps, door clearances and hardware, the bar and dining tables, and restroom features. The restroom allegations included problems with the door, lavatory, pipes, paper-towel dispenser, toilet, grab bar, plumbing valves, and urinal. The judgment cited the ADA Accessibility Guidelines provisions addressing these features.

Default and Legal Analysis

The complaint was filed on February 29, 2024. The defendants were served through the New York Secretary of State on March 5, 2024, and proof of service was filed on April 10, 2024. The defendants did not appear or answer by the March 26, 2024 deadline and did not attend the show-cause hearing on July 10, 2024.

The court explained that a defendant’s default admits the well-pleaded factual allegations in the complaint, but does not require the court to accept the legal conclusion that those facts establish liability. The court therefore determined whether the allegations established liability as a matter of law. It found subject-matter jurisdiction because the claim arose under federal law and found personal jurisdiction based on the allegation that the defendants maintained a principal place of business in New York State.

For a Title III ADA claim, the court stated that a plaintiff must show that the plaintiff has a disability covered by the ADA, that the defendant owns, leases, or operates a place of public accommodation, and that the defendant discriminated against the plaintiff. The court concluded that the complaint adequately alleged each element, including that the restaurant was a place of public accommodation, that accessibility barriers existed, and that removing them was readily achievable.

Judgment

The court entered a final default judgment against Kedo LLC and El Paso 116 Corp. It ordered the defendants to apply for, obtain, and cause the removal and remediation of the listed accessibility barriers.

The judgment also ordered Gomez to serve the defendants with the judgment and supporting papers by certified U.S. mail and file proof of service by August 30, 2024. It further stated that, if Gomez intended to seek attorney’s fees and costs, he was to file a letter by September 4, 2024, stating that intent and requesting a referral to a magistrate judge for a damages inquest. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the motion at Docket No. 20.

The authoritative version

Read the full 9-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.