Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 16, 2026

Samuel Lopez v. Mizmor 91 LLC, et al.

Judge
Rearden
Docket
1:24-cv-02635
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
5

Counsel1 of record
PLAINTIFF
Maria Costanza Barducci Barducci Law Firm PLLC

Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.

Fee PetitionADA / DisabilityCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Samuel Lopez v. Mizmor 91 LLC, Judge Rearden adopted the fee recommendation, awarding $6,912.50 in fees and $405 in costs.

Who this affects

The order affects Samuel Lopez and defendants Mizmor 91 LLC and Kabbo Pizza and Fried Chicken Inc. It awards Lopez $6,912.50 in attorney fees and $405 in costs and closes the case.

What happened

In Samuel Lopez v. Mizmor 91 LLC, Samuel Lopez sued Mizmor 91 LLC and Kabbo Pizza and Fried Chicken Inc. under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The court had previously entered a default judgment and referred the issues of injunctive relief, attorney fees, and costs for further review.

Lopez requested $8,715.50 in attorney fees and $2,493.25 in costs. A magistrate judge recommended awarding $6,912.50 in fees and $405 in costs. Neither side objected to that recommendation.

Judge Rearden adopted the recommendation in its entirety, found no clear error, ordered Lopez to serve the defendants by July 23, 2026, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Samuel Lopez v. Mizmor 91 LLC, et al. · No. 1:24-cv-02635
Judge
Rearden
Date
July 16, 2026

Background

Samuel Lopez brought an action against Mizmor 91 LLC and Kabbo Pizza and Fried Chicken Inc. under the Americans with Disabilities Act. On June 25, 2025, the Court entered a default judgment against the defendants and referred the issues of injunctive relief, attorney fees, and costs to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger.

The Court previously adopted Judge Lehrburger’s recommendation concerning injunctive relief and other matters. That recommendation required the defendants to address barriers at the restaurant entrance and directed Lopez to file a motion for reasonable attorney fees and costs within 180 days. It also recommended denying Lopez’s requests for post-dated checks for the fees and for closing the restaurant pending remediation. The recommendation stated that the complaint did not sufficiently allege that the restaurant’s service counter was inaccessible. Lopez later stated that he intended to continue litigating the service-counter issue, but he did not file an amended pleading on that issue.

Fee request and recommendation

Lopez moved for attorney fees and costs, requesting $8,715.50 in fees and $2,493.25 in costs. On March 18, 2026, Judge Lehrburger recommended an award of $6,912.50 in attorney fees and $405 in costs. The recommendation gave the parties fourteen days to file objections and warned that failing to object would waive the right to object and prevent appellate review. No party filed an objection or requested more time.

Court’s review and ruling

Because no timely objections were filed, the Court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record. The Court stated that the parties had waived further judicial review, but it reviewed the recommendation anyway and found no clear error. It described the recommendation as well reasoned and supported by the facts and law.

The Court adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. The order therefore awards $6,912.50 in attorney fees and $405 in costs. It also requires Lopez to serve the order on each defendant by July 23, 2026 and file proof of service. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 5-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.