Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00344/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00344-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Marie Elayne Calagna
Defendant
Scott N. Johnson
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SCOTT N. JOHNSON, 

 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-0344 GEB GGH

 vs. 

MARIE ELAYNE CALAGNA, FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 

Individually and as Trustee of the

Calagna Survivor’s Trust, et al. 

Defendants. 

___________________________/

Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment against Defendant Marie Elayne

Calagna, filed July 28, 2006, was submitted on the record; the hearing scheduled for September

21, 2006, was vacated. E. D. Cal. L. R. 78-230(h). Upon review of the motion and supporting

documents, and good cause appearing, the court issues the following findings and

recommendations.

BACKGROUND

On February 17, 2006, plaintiff filed the underlying complaint in this action

against defendant Marie Elayne Calagna, Individually and as Trustee of the Calagna Survivor’s

Trust, which owns the property operated as “Lorees’ Little Shack on Greenback” at 6901

Greenback Lane, Citrus Heights, California. See Complaint, at pp. 2-3; Grant Deed, attached as

Case 2:06-cv-00344-GEB-GGH Document 17 Filed 09/14/06 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

 As there is no proof of service upon any other person, it is presumed that plaintiff, 1

pursuant to his motion for default judgment, is dismissing Does 1 through 10. Otherwise, an

interlocutory partial judgment against only Marie Elayne Calagna would be improper.

 Cal.Civil Code § 52(a) provides: “Whoever denies, aids or incites a denial, or makes

2

any discrimination or distinction contrary to Section 51, 51.5, or 51.6, is liable for each and every

offense for the actual damages, and any amount that may be determined by a jury, or a court

sitting without a jury, up to a maximum of three times the amount of actual damage but in no

case less than four thousand dollars ($4,000), and any attorney’s fees that may be determined by

the court in addition thereto, suffered by any person denied the rights provided in Section 51,

51.5, or 51.6.”

2

exhibit to Motion for Default Judgment. Plaintiff alleges he attempted to patronize the restaurant

on September 28, 2004, but “did not stay” because he “was unable to park (safely).” Complaint,

at p. 3. He asserts the parking lot lacks a properly configured van accessible disabled parking

space in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act and state law. Id. The summons and

complaint were personally served on an adult male residing at defendant’s residence, on April 3,

2006. Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e)(2). Pacific Atlantic Trading Co. v. M/V Main Express, 758 F.2d 1

1325, 1331 (9th Cir. 1985) (default judgment void without personal jurisdiction). Defendant has

failed to file an answer or otherwise appear in this action. On June 9, 2005, the clerk entered

default against defendant Marie Elayne Calagna. 

Notice of entry of default and the instant motion for default judgment and

supporting papers were not served on defendant. If default judgment is sought against a party

who has appeared in the action, the party must be served with written notice of the application

for judgment at least three days prior to the hearing. Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(b)(2). As defendant

never appeared in the action, there was no requirement that she be given notice of plaintiff’s

motion for default judgment. See LG Electronics, Inc. v. Advance Creative Computer Corp., 212

F. Supp. 2d 1171, 1174 (N.D. Cal., 2002). Plaintiff seeks an entry of default judgment in the

amount of $8,000 pursuant to California Civil Code section 52(a). 

2

/ / / / /

/ / / / /

Case 2:06-cv-00344-GEB-GGH Document 17 Filed 09/14/06 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

 While plaintiff seeks $4000 for each actual visit to the restaurant and each foregone 3

visit (see Motion for Default Judgment, at p. 3, and Complaint, at p. 18), he has pled only that he

visited the restaurant parking lot one time, on September 28, 2004 (Complaint, at p. 3); plaintiff’s

general statement he “would like to be able to return” is inadequate to demonstrate a foregone

visit.

3

DISCUSSION

Entry of default effects an admission of all well-pleaded allegations of the

complaint by the defaulted party. Geddes v. United Financial Group, 559 F.2d 557 (9th Cir.

1977). The court finds the well pleaded allegations of the complaint state a claim for which

relief can be granted. Anderson v. Air West, 542 F.2d 1090, 1093 (9th Cir. 1976). The

memorandum of points and authorities and affidavits filed in support of the motion for entry of

default judgment also support the finding that plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested. There

are no policy considerations which preclude the entry of default judgment of the type requested. 

See Eitel v. McCool, 782 F.2d 1470, 1471-1472 (9th Cir. 1986). 

In view of the foregoing findings, it is the recommendation of this court that:

1. Plaintiffs’ motion for entry of default judgment be GRANTED as to Marie

Elayne Calagna, Individually and as Trustee of the Calagna Survivor’s Trust. Judgment should

be rendered in the amount of $4,000.3

2. Defendants Does 1 through 10 be dismissed from this action.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the Honorable Garland E.

Burrell, Jr., United States District Judge, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(l). Within ten days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any

party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document

should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any

reply to the objections shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. 

\\\\\

\\\\\

Case 2:06-cv-00344-GEB-GGH Document 17 Filed 09/14/06 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

4

The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the

right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: 9/13/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

___________________________________

 GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOW6:Johnson0344.def.wpd

Case 2:06-cv-00344-GEB-GGH Document 17 Filed 09/14/06 Page 4 of 4