Love v. Barcelino Continental Corp.

Background

This Americans with Disabilities Act access case concerned the procedures for a site inspection and settlement meeting under Northern District of California General Order 56. The parties completed a joint site inspection and held a settlement conference on January 31, 2020. Defendant’s counsel stated that Love was absent without excuse and that the attorney who attended for Love had not formally appeared in the case. Love’s counsel disputed that the parties had agreed Love would attend and said Love’s absence was justified by concerns about hostile situations involving opposing counsel and clients.

General Order 56 allows a party to seek relief from the personal-attendance requirement when attendance would be unsafe or otherwise inappropriate. The court explained that such relief must be requested through a stipulation and proposed order or a motion for administrative relief. The court found that Love had filed neither before the January 31 conference and had not shown good cause for failing to do so. The court also rejected Love’s argument that defendant’s counsel did not expect Love to attend.

Rulings

The court ordered the parties to schedule and conduct a video settlement conference by August 31, 2020, in accordance with General Order 56, with all required parties attending. The court granted Defendant’s request for $2,000 in attorney’s fees incurred in connection with the January 31 settlement conference, treating the payment as a sanction for Love’s violation of General Order 56. Love was ordered to pay by August 31 and file a declaration with proof of payment by September 8. The court denied Defendant’s motion to lift the stay that General Order 56 imposed on discovery and motion filings.