Johnson v. La Fontaine Food, Inc.

Background

Scott Johnson asserted claims under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act. He alleged that he has significant manual dexterity impairments, is a C-5 quadriplegic who uses a wheelchair, and encountered a lack of wheelchair-accessible outdoor dining surfaces at La Fontaine in April and May 2021. He alleged that the surfaces lacked sufficient wheelchair clearance and that he intended to return once the restaurant was made accessible. He sought an injunction, statutory damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.

La Fontaine Food, Inc. did not appear or respond. At Johnson’s request, the clerk entered default. Johnson then moved for default judgment, which is a judgment entered after a defendant fails to defend. The court decided the motion without oral argument and vacated the scheduled hearing.

Jurisdiction and Service

The court found federal-question jurisdiction based on the ADA claim and supplemental jurisdiction over the Unruh Act claim. It also found personal jurisdiction over La Fontaine, noting public records indicating that the defendant is a California corporation.

The court found service proper. Johnson’s proof of service showed that the summons and complaint were left with the office manager at the business of Murat Sumbul, the defendant’s agent for service of process, on July 9, 2021, and were then mailed to Sumbul at the same address.

Default Judgment Analysis

The court applied the seven factors used in the Ninth Circuit to decide whether default judgment is appropriate. It found that the factors supported judgment. Without default judgment, Johnson would have no other means of recourse because the defendant had not participated. The amount of statutory damages sought was proportional to the alleged conduct, and nothing before the court indicated a likely factual dispute or that the default resulted from excusable neglect.

The court also found that Johnson had adequately pleaded standing and meritorious claims. His allegations showed an injury from personally encountering an accessibility barrier, a connection between that barrier and the defendant’s conduct, and the possibility that court-ordered relief would remedy the injury. The court found that Johnson adequately alleged an ADA disability, that La Fontaine was a private entity operating a restaurant as a place of public accommodation, and that he was denied full and equal access because of his disability. It also found that removal of the alleged barriers was readily achievable. Because the court stated that an ADA violation necessarily constitutes a violation of the Unruh Act, it treated the related state-law claim as adequately supported as well.

Relief

The court granted Johnson’s request for an injunction requiring La Fontaine to provide wheelchair-accessible outdoor dining surfaces at the restaurant at 186 Castro Street, Mountain View, California, in compliance with the 2010 ADA Accessibility Guidelines.

Johnson sought $8,000 in statutory damages for two alleged instances of discrimination. The court awarded $4,000, explaining that it had previously declined to award separate statutory damages for multiple visits to the same facility in similar circumstances.

Johnson sought $1,930 in attorneys’ fees. The court found that the evidence only partially supported the requested rates, approved lower hourly rates for the attorneys and legal assistants, and found the requested 7.5 hours reasonable. The court awarded $837 in costs. In the order, it awarded Johnson $2,202 in attorneys’ fees and costs.

Order

The court granted in part Johnson’s motion for default judgment; awarded $4,000 in statutory damages and $2,202 in attorneys’ fees and costs; and granted the requested injunction. Johnson was required to promptly serve the order on the defendant and file proof of service. He was also required to submit a proposed judgment and injunction consistent with the order within seven days.