Adams v. 57 Clinton Street, LLC
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-06771
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Adams v. 57 Clinton Street, LLC, Judge Schofield entered default judgment requiring ADA barrier removal and allowing a later fees-and-costs motion.
Joshua Adams and 57 Clinton Street, LLC. The judgment requires 57 Clinton Street, LLC to address listed accessibility barriers and permits Adams to seek costs and reasonable attorney’s fees through a later motion.
What happened
In Adams v. 57 Clinton Street, LLC, Joshua Adams alleged that structural barriers at the defendant’s restaurant prevented him from accessing and fully enjoying its goods and services. The defendant was served but did not appear or answer.
The court entered final default judgment against 57 Clinton Street, LLC. It required the defendant to apply for, obtain, and arrange removal and remediation of listed accessibility barriers within 90 days, including problems with accessible routes, an entrance, and service and dining counters. Adams must serve the judgment and supporting papers by January 9, 2024, and may file a later motion for costs and reasonable attorney’s fees within 180 days after entry of the judgment.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield concluded that the complaint adequately alleged an Americans with Disabilities Act claim and that the court had authority over the dispute and the defendant. The court’s order did not itself award a specific amount of costs or attorney’s fees.
The detailed version
- Adams v. 57 Clinton Street, LLC · No. 1:23-cv-06771
- Lorna Schofield
- Jan. 4, 2024
Background
Joshua Adams filed the complaint on August 2,
- The opinion states that 57 Clinton Street, LLC was served through the New York Secretary of State on August 22, 2023, and that proof of service was filed on August 25,
- The defendant did not appear or answer, and the deadline to answer expired on September 12,
- A show-cause hearing was held on December 13, 2023.
The complaint alleged that Adams, who uses a wheelchair because of congenital spina bifida and hydrocephalus, was denied access to and full and equal enjoyment of the goods and services at the defendant’s restaurant because of structural barriers. The opinion identifies alleged barriers involving the entrance, a change in floor level, and service and dining counters, among others.
Court’s analysis
Because the defendant defaulted, it admitted the complaint’s well-pleaded factual allegations, but the court still had to determine whether those allegations established legal liability. The court found that the complaint adequately alleged an Americans with Disabilities Act claim and entitlement to injunctive relief. The opinion describes the restaurant as a place of public accommodation and concludes that the alleged inaccessible features were sufficient to state a claim under the statutory requirements discussed in the opinion.
The opinion also concluded that subject-matter jurisdiction was proper because the claim arose under federal law. It found personal jurisdiction proper because the defendant transacted business in New York, the claim arose from activities at the property at 57 Clinton Street in New York, New York, and the defendant had sufficient contacts with the state.
Judgment
Judge Lorna G. Schofield entered a final default judgment against 57 Clinton Street, LLC. The judgment requires the defendant, within 90 days after entry, to apply for, obtain, and cause the removal and remediation of the listed accessibility barriers. The listed requirements concern accessible routes and entrances, maneuvering clearance and floor levels at an entrance, an accessible service counter, an accessible dining counter, and required toe clearance at the dining counter.
The judgment also requires Adams to serve a copy of the judgment and supporting papers by certified U.S. mail and file proof of service by January 9, 2024. It allows Adams 180 days after entry of the judgment to file a motion to tax costs and request reasonable attorney’s fees. The judgment does not state a specific fee or cost award.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.