Acosta v. Singh

Summary

The document contains Findings and Recommendations by a United States Magistrate Judge recommending that Plaintiff Jose Acosta’s motion for default judgment be granted against Jaswant Singh and Rajinder Kaur. It addresses proper service, the Eitel factors, claims under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the California Unruh Act, and California accessibility laws. The recommendations include $4,000 in statutory damages, $3,774.76 in attorney’s fees and costs, and injunctive relief requiring removal of specified accessibility barriers.

Holdings

1. Defendants were properly served by personal service, and the clerk properly entered default against them.
2. The six Eitel factors overwhelmingly favored entry of default judgment.
3. The complaint adequately stated a prima facie Title III ADA discrimination claim based on alleged architectural barriers at a place of public accommodation.
4. The complaint adequately stated claims under the California Unruh Civil Rights Act and the cited California accessibility statutes.
5. Plaintiff was entitled to recommended injunctive relief requiring removal of the identified barriers within sixty days of the district court's order.
6. The court recommended an award of $4,000 in Unruh Act statutory damages and $3,774.76 in attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs.

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendants were properly served and the clerk's defaults were lawfully entered.
2. Whether the six Eitel factors supported entry of default judgment.
3. Whether the complaint adequately stated claims under Title III of the ADA, the California Unruh Civil Rights Act, and California accessibility statutes.
4. Whether plaintiff was entitled to injunctive relief requiring removal of specified architectural barriers.
5. Whether plaintiff was entitled to $4,000 in statutory damages and $3,774.76 in attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs.

Disposition

other