Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Johnson v. Top Investment Property LLC, 2:15-cv-0181-TLN-DB. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180917899 Visitors: 14
Filed: Sep. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 13, 2018
Summary: ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(19). On August 17, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the findings and recommendations. The fourteen-day period has expired, and Plaintiff has not fi
More

ORDER

The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 302(c)(19). On August 17, 2018, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days after service of the findings and recommendations. The fourteen-day period has expired, and Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the findings and recommendations.

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 17, 2018 (ECF No. 27) are ADOPTED in full;

2. Plaintiff's September 13, 2017 motion for default judgment (ECF No. 23) is GRANTED;

3. Judgment is entered against Defendants, Top Investment Property LLC and Top Auto Repair, Inc.;

4. Defendants are ordered to pay Plaintiff $4,000 in statutory damages;

5. Defendants are ordered to correct the violations at the "Top Auto Repair" identified in Plaintiff's complaint, to the extent that Defendants have the legal right to do so, so that the facility is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

6. Defendants are ordered to pay Plaintiff $2,900 in attorneys' fees;

7. Defendants are ordered to pay Plaintiff $440 in costs; and

8. This case is closed.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer