Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 24, 2021

Love v. Cartwright Hotel Group, LP

Judge
Thomas Hixson
Docket
3:20-cv-08916
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureADA / Disability
In one sentence

In Love v. Cartwright Hotel Group, LP, Judge Hixson granted the defendants’ motion to set aside the entry of default so the case could proceed.

Who this affects

Cartwright Hotel, Inc. and Cartwright Hotel Group, LP were relieved from the entry of default; Samuel Love’s case was allowed to proceed on the merits.

What happened

Love v. Cartwright Hotel Group, LP concerns a motion by Cartwright Hotel, Inc. and Cartwright Hotel Group, LP to set aside an entry of default after they failed to respond. Samuel Love did not oppose the motion.

The defendants said their failure to respond resulted from the unexpected death of their registered agent for service. They also said they could defend against Love’s claims by showing that the Cartwright Hotel’s reservations website complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act and related Justice Department regulations.

The court found that the failure to respond was unintentional, that the defendants had identified a possible defense, and that setting aside the default would not unfairly harm Love. Judge Thomas Hixson granted the motion and ordered the parties to meet and confer and file a joint status report.

The detailed version

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

Case
Love v. Cartwright Hotel Group, LP · No. 3:20-cv-08916
Judge
Thomas Hixson
Date
Mar. 24, 2021

Background

Cartwright Hotel, Inc. and Cartwright Hotel Group, LP moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c) to set aside the entry of default against them. Samuel Love filed a statement saying he did not oppose the motion. The court decided the matter without oral argument and vacated the scheduled hearing.

Legal standard

Rule 55(c) permits a court to set aside an entry of default for “good cause.” The court considered whether the defendants engaged in culpable conduct that caused the default, whether they had a potentially meritorious defense, and whether setting aside the default would prejudice Love. The court also noted that default is a drastic measure and that cases should generally be decided on their merits when possible.

Court’s analysis

The defendants explained that they failed to respond because of inadvertence following the recent death of their registered agent for service of process. The court found that this failure was unintentional and therefore was not culpable conduct.

The defendants also asserted that they could show that the Cartwright Hotel’s reservations website complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Department of Justice regulations. The court treated that assertion as sufficient to identify a potentially meritorious defense at this stage. It did not decide whether the website actually complies; the truth of that defense would be addressed in later litigation.

The court found no relevant prejudice to Love. The entry of default had occurred only about one month earlier, and Love did not oppose setting it aside. The court therefore concluded that all three good-cause factors favored reopening the case.

Disposition

The court granted the defendants’ motion to set aside the entry of default. It directed the parties to meet and confer and then file a joint status report by April 7, 2021, concerning the deadlines under General Order 56. The opinion did not decide the underlying Americans with Disabilities Act claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.