EcomBack 2024 ADA Website
Accessibility Lawsuits Annual Report
3,188 ADA website lawsuits filed from January to December 2024
U.S. map showing 2024 ADA website lawsuits: New York (1,600), Florida (629), California (485), Pennsylvania (121), and 353 from other states.
ADA Web Accessibility Lawsuits – Executive Summary
Ecomback’s 2024 ADA Website Lawsuits Report highlights critical trends, data insights, and key takeaways from a year marked by continued scrutiny of digital accessibility compliance. With a total of 3,188 lawsuits filed, this report provides a comprehensive overview of the major contributors, targeted platforms, industries affected, and evolving legal landscape.
Key Findings
State-Wise Analysis
- New York, Florida and California remained the most active states for ADA website lawsuits, with 1,600 lawsuits (50.19%), 629 (19.73%) and 485 lawsuits (15.21%), respectively. Together, they accounted for over 85% of all filings, reflecting their plaintiff-friendly legal environments.
Plaintiff Trends
- A total of 231 plaintiffs initiated ADA website lawsuits, with 35 prolific plaintiffs filing 50.79% of all cases.
- The most active plaintiff was Victor Ariza, represented by Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. filed 113 lawsuits.
Plaintiff Firms
- Stein Saks, PLLC led as the top plaintiff firm, filing 428 lawsuits, making up 13.43% of all cases. However, the firm faced judicial sanctions during the year, including a $1,000 penalty for insufficient standing allegations, underscoring increasing scrutiny by courts.
- Stein Saks, PLLC was also accused of fraud by Experian in credit related lawsuits and actions.
Repeat Lawsuits: A Growing Concern
The issue of repeat lawsuits highlights the persistent vulnerability of businesses to ADA litigation. In 2024 alone:
- 2 businesses were sued 4 times
- 26 businesses were sued 3 times
- 108 businesses were sued 2 times
Industry Trends
- The Lifestyle, Fashion, Clothing & Apparel industry was the most targeted, with 1,121 lawsuits (35.16%), followed by Restaurant, Food, Drinks & Beverages at 758 lawsuits (23.78%).
- Industries with consumer-facing websites faced the greatest challenges in meeting accessibility compliance, highlighting the need for proactive measures to mitigate litigation risks.
Accessibility Widgets
- Accessibility widgets remained under scrutiny, with 722 lawsuits (22.65%) filed against websites using these tools.
- Websites that used widgets were sued. accessiBe with 258 cases, followed by UserWay (187).
- Regulatory actions, including a $1 million Federal Trade Commission (FTC) fine against accessiBe amplified awareness of widget limitations and false compliance claims.
Platform Trends
- Custom-coded websites faced the highest number of lawsuits, with 1,332 cases (41.78%), reflecting challenges in maintaining consistent accessibility standards for developer teams.
- Websites using Shopify accounted for 1,014 lawsuits (31.81%), maintaining its position as the most targeted e-commerce platform.
- Websites on other popular platforms, such as WordPress (603 lawsuits) and Magento (100 lawsuits), also saw significant legal challenges.
Total ADA Website Lawsuits Filed in 2023 & 2024
Annual Comparison of ADA Website Lawsuits Filed
Chart Description
The bar chart compares total ADA website lawsuits in 2023 (aqua) and 2024 (red) across key U.S. states.
Highlights:
- New York: Declined from 2,140 (2023) to 1,600 (2024).
- California: Dropped from 953 (2023) to 485 (2024).
- Florida: Increased from 473 (2023) to 629 (2024).
- All Other States: Rose significantly from 137 (2023) to 353 (2024).
This data highlights state-wise trends and shifts in ADA website lawsuits over the two years.
In 2024, 3,188 ADA website lawsuits were filed across the United States, a decrease of 674 cases (17.46%) from 2023’s total of 3,862. This decline, while notable, highlights the continued importance of addressing digital accessibility compliance under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The comparison chart shows a significant reduction in lawsuits in New York, which decreased from 2,140 in 2023 to 1,600 in 2024, representing a decrease of 540 lawsuits (25.23%), primarily due to a shift in filing activity from federal to state courts, which are harder to track and the increased use of private demand letters.
Conversely, Florida experienced a notable rise, with lawsuits increasing from 473 in 2023 to 629 in 2024, marking an increase of 156 lawsuits (32.98%), signaling shifting dynamics in ADA enforcement.
California, with 485 lawsuits, maintained its position as one of the most active states for accessibility litigation due in part to the profitable nature of penalties under the Unruh act.
The comparison chart between 2023 and 2024 highlights evolving trends in ADA website litigation. Businesses in high-activity states such as New York, Florida, and California should prioritize accessibility improvements to meet compliance standards and reduce the risk of legal challenges.
ADA Website Lawsuits Filed by State in 2024
| State Wise - Total ADA Lawsuits Filed | Total Lawsuits | Percentage | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New York | 1600 | 50.19% | 136 | 154 | 143 | 102 | 136 | 117 | 121 | 122 | 147 | 154 | 142 | 126 |
| Florida | 629 | 19.73% | 38 | 42 | 49 | 47 | 45 | 45 | 57 | 56 | 43 | 80 | 65 | 62 |
| California | 485 | 15.21% | 34 | 55 | 74 | 37 | 48 | 22 | 31 | 38 | 46 | 28 | 46 | 26 |
| Pennsylvania | 121 | 3.80% | 5 | 10 | 6 | 24 | 9 | 28 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 24 |
| All Other States | 353 | 11.07% | 8 | 17 | 14 | 23 | 22 | 20 | 30 | 52 | 47 | 47 | 32 | 41 |
| Total ADA Lawsuits Filed | 3,188 | 100% | 221 | 278 | 286 | 233 | 260 | 232 | 248 | 270 | 286 | 309 | 286 | 279 |
State-Level Trends:
- New York: 1,600 lawsuits (50.19% of total lawsuits in 2024)
- Florida: 629 lawsuits (19.73%)
- California: 485 lawsuits (15.21%)
- Pennsylvania: 121 lawsuits (3.80%)
- All Other States: 353 lawsuits (11.07%)
Key Observations:
- New York remains the leading state for ADA website lawsuits, accounting for half of the total cases, despite a significant decline from 2023.
- Florida has become the second-largest state for ADA lawsuits, showing a sharp increase of 33% compared to the previous year.
- California maintained steady activity, with 82.89% of its cases originating in Los Angeles County Superior Court.
Insights on New York and California Courts:
New York Courts
- Southern District of New York (SDNY): Dominated with 1,090 lawsuits (68.13% of NY cases), making it the most active court for ADA website litigation in the country.
- Eastern District of New York (EDNY): Filed 378 lawsuits (23.63% of NY cases), continuing its role as a major venue for such cases.
- Federal courts in New York remain a top choice for plaintiffs due to favorable legal precedents, making them a focal point for ADA filings.
- Legal actions by some plaintiff firms have also shifted to NY State courts, where they are more difficult to track.
California Courts
- Los Angeles County Superior Court: Led California filings with 402 lawsuits (82.89% of CA cases), reaffirming its importance as the state’s central hub for ADA litigation.
- Other courts, including Orange County and San Francisco, saw significantly fewer cases, showing the concentration of filings in Los Angeles.
Reasons for Decrease in ADA Website Lawsuits in 2024
The decline in ADA website lawsuits, from 3,862 in 2023 to 3,188 in 2024, reflects not only shifts in enforcement but also broader legal and strategic changes. Key contributing factors include:
- The Supreme Court’s handling of Acheson Hotels v. Laufer may have contributed to the decline in ADA lawsuits by creating uncertainty around the standing of “tester” plaintiffs. This uncertainty, coupled with the suspension of Thomas Bacon, a prominent attorney representing Deborah Laufer in ADA “tester” lawsuits, likely discouraged similar filings at the federal level by certain attorneys.The shift in focus to state courts, demand letters, and other legal strategies, such as privacy claims, further influenced the reduction in publicly filed cases and rather sweeping them into harder to track avenues.
- Judicial Pushback in Federal Courts
The Southern District of New York (SDNY) Chief Judge’s ruling in 2024 signaled a strong resistance to ADA web-only cases. This decision may have discouraged plaintiffs attorneys from filing cases in federal courts without sufficient standing, especially cases involving minor or unclear harm. As a result, many ADA lawsuits may be either redirected to state courts, changed to secretive demand letters, or abandoned altogether. - Evolving Legal Strategies: Shift to State Courts and Demand Letters
A significant factor contributing to the decline in publicly documented ADA website lawsuits in 2024 is the strategic shift by prominent plaintiff firms, including Mizrahi Kroub LLP, from filing cases in federal courts to state courts. In 2024 we were able to track 65 lawsuits from NY State courts and none in Federal court, marking a significant change in Mizrahi Kroub LLP’s strategy and volume.This broader shift to state courts is particularly evident in jurisdictions like California and Pennsylvania, where fragmented reporting systems make state-level filings harder to monitor. The reduced visibility of state court cases has contributed to the apparent decline in total ADA lawsuits reported in federal databases, even as litigation activity likely remains high.What this means is that there are still ADA website claims being made, but they are less visible, harder to track, and easier to pursue.
Adding to this shift is the increasing reliance on demand letters as a primary legal strategy. For example, attorney Kevin Tucker, representing plaintiff Blair Douglas, has focused on resolving ADA claims through demand letters before lawsuits are filed. These demand letters often result in settlements that are not publicly documented, further contributing to the decline in visible cases.
"Litigation Numbers Don't Tell the Whole Story – Demand Letters Show a Much Darker Reality.”
Some prominent defense attorneys have reported that for every lawsuit filed that lands on their desk, they manage at least 7 to 10 demand letters.
This shows that the litigation numbers are surely an indicator but they are not an absolute picture, which is much worse than before.
Example of a Typical Demand Letter
Via Federal ExpressWebsite Company12345 Main Street, Your City, StateAttention Legal Department
Re: Website Accessibility Lawsuit
To Whom It May Concern:
This law firm has been retained by a blind consumer to pursue a claim against you under the California Unruh Act.
In short, your website (website address) is not fully accessible to visually-impaired individuals, Indeed, the California Supreme Court recently confirmed that anti-discrimination laws apply to commercial websites. We urge you to consult your own counsel about your rights and obligations in this emerging area of law.
We plan to file suit in the near future. If you wish to discuss this matter, your counsel should promptly contact me.
Sincerely,
Key Implications for Businesses
- The move to state courts and the use of demand letters create challenges for tracking ADA litigation trends.
- Businesses must remain vigilant in addressing accessibility issues proactively to mitigate the risk of both lawsuits and costly settlements.
- Monitoring legal developments at the state level is becoming increasingly critical for understanding the evolving landscape of ADA compliance enforcement.
This evolving strategy by plaintiff firms reflects a shift in the litigation landscape, underscoring the need for businesses to adopt a proactive approach to accessibility compliance while staying informed about state-specific trends and risks.
- Diversion of Focus to Privacy Claims
- Increased Settlements and Higher Demands
Conclusion
The reduction in ADA website lawsuits in 2024 reflects a shift in legal strategies rather than a significant improvement in accessibility compliance. Key factors contributing to this decline include increased judicial scrutiny, the shift of cases from federal to state courts—where filings are harder to track—the rise in demand letter settlements, and the growing focus on privacy claims under laws like the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA).
Additionally, the suspension of Thomas Bacon, a prominent attorney in ADA “tester” cases, coupled with the uncertainty surrounding the Supreme Court’s handling of Acheson Hotels v. Laufer may have further discouraged the filing of similar federal lawsuits.
A notable trend has been the increasing use of demand letters as a primary enforcement strategy, as seen with Kevin Tucker, who has shifted to resolving ADA claims on behalf of clients like Blair Douglas through demand letters. These letters often lead to settlements without formal lawsuits, contributing to the decline in publicly documented cases and signaling a growing trend toward pre-litigation resolutions.
The transition of firms like Mizrahi Kroub LLP from federal to state courts demonstrate a redirection in enforcement tactics that has impacted the visibility of ADA litigation. These evolving strategies indicate that while federal filings have declined, state court activity and out-of-court settlements remain prevalent and largely unreported.
Businesses must remain proactive in ensuring their websites comply with ADA and WCAG standards to avoid legal exposure. Moreover, with the rise of privacy-related claims targeting user data collection and tracking practices, it is equally crucial for businesses to assess their risks associated with emerging privacy regulations. Staying ahead of these developments is essential to maintaining compliance and mitigating legal risks in an increasingly complex regulatory landscape.
35 Plaintiff Filed over 50% of Total ADA Lawsuits in 2024
The data reflects a heavy concentration of ADA lawsuits among a small number of prolific plaintiffs, with 35 plaintiffs driving more than half of all filings. Individual plaintiff activity peaks in specific months, such as Jessica Karim’s high filings in April, further illustrating the strategic timing of these lawsuits.
The table below highlights the top plaintiffs and the law firms that represented them, along with the total number of ADA lawsuits they filed in 2024:
| Plaintiff Name | Firm Name | Total Lawsuits | Percentage | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Victor Ariza | Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. | 113 | 3.54% | 4 | 10 | 14 | 7 | 11 | 11 | 14 | 10 | 7 | 8 | 4 | 13 |
| Nelson Fernandez | Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. | 89 | 2.79% | 11 | 6 | 6 | 11 | 10 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 9 | 12 | 4 | 3 |
| Jessica Karim | Gabriel A. Levy, P.C. | 85 | 2.67% | 12 | 6 | 8 | 25 | 3 | 12 | 8 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Julie Dalton | Throndset Michenfelder Law Office, LLC | 79 | 2.48% | 2 | 4 | 2 | 9 | 5 | 9 | 5 | 11 | 5 | 10 | 8 | 9 |
| Oscar Herrera | Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. | 74 | 2.32% | 0 | 4 | 2 | 11 | 1 | 10 | 9 | 1 | 8 | 4 | 10 | 14 |
| Alejandro Espinoza | Mendez Law Offices, PLLC | 61 | 1.91% | 2 | 6 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 6 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 5 |
| Rebecca Castillo | Manning Law, APC | 56 | 1.76% | 10 | 10 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 7 | 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Cesar Cotto | Manning Law, APC | 53 | 1.66% | 4 | 5 | 12 | 7 | 3 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Jennifer Carbine | Manning Law, APC | 49 | 1.54% | 3 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 6 | 9 | 6 | 4 | 9 | 0 |
| Ali Colak | Stein Saks, PLLC | 48 | 1.51% | 19 | 8 | 13 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Angela Wahab | Stein Saks, PLLC | 48 | 1.51% | 13 | 4 | 11 | 1 | 7 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Arantza Castro | Mendez Law Offices, PLLC | 45 | 1.41% | 3 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 3 |
| Edery Herrera | Gottlieb & Associates | 44 | 1.38% | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9 | 13 | 0 | 13 | 4 |
| Carlton Knowles | Gottlieb & Associates | 43 | 1.35% | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 15 |
| Blair Douglass | East End Trial Group LLC | 43 | 1.35% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 |
| Perla Mageno | Manning Law, APC | 42 | 1.32% | 2 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 6 | 7 |
| Pedro Liz | Gabriel A. Levy, P.C. | 42 | 1.32% | 3 | 4 | 5 | 4 | 10 | 2 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| Timothy Hernandez | Stein Saks, PLLC | 41 | 1.29% | 2 | 0 | 6 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 9 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 0 |
| Luis Licea | Pacific Trial Attorneys, APC | 37 | 1.16% | 0 | 3 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 9 | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| James Murphy | Gottlieb & Associates | 37 | 1.16% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 18 |
| Drew Hunthausen | Pacific Trial Attorneys, APC | 36 | 1.13% | 6 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Derrick Anderson | Mars Khaimov Law, PLLC | 36 | 1.13% | 0 | 0 | 23 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jacqueline Fernandez | Stein Saks, PLLC | 36 | 1.13% | 0 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| Robert Glen Myers | ADA Legal Team, LLC | 35 | 1.10% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 3 | 11 | 7 | 7 |
| Windy Lucius | J. Courtney Cunningham, PLLC | 33 | 1.04% | 8 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Enrique Alvear | Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. | 33 | 1.04% | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 10 | 3 | 10 | 2 | 0 |
| Raymond T. Mahlberg | Barros Law Firm | 32 | 1.00% | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 3 | 1 |
| Biglang-Awa Castro Sheila | Manning Law, APC | 32 | 1.00% | 2 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| Sanjay Sookul | Mars Khaimov Law, PLLC | 32 | 1.00% | 16 | 0 | 5 | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Frangie Espinal | Gottlieb & Associates | 32 | 1.00% | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 11 | 0 | 0 |
| Clarence Frost | Throndset Michenfelder Law Office, LLC | 32 | 1.00% | 4 | 3 | 5 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 5 |
| Felipe Fernandez | Stein Saks, PLLC | 31 | 0.97% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
| Jonathan Drummond | Aleksandra Kravets, Esq. P.A. | 31 | 0.97% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Dominick Martin | Pacific Trial Attorneys, APC | 30 | 0.94% | 4 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 8 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Alfred Trippett | Gabriel A. Levy, P.C. | 29 | 0.91% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 1 | 6 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Total Lawsuits Filed by 35 Plaintiffs | 1,619 | 50.79% | 136 | 124 | 167 | 141 | 125 | 132 | 143 | 142 | 116 | 123 | 110 | 160 | |
| Total Lawsuits Filed by 196 Plaintiffs | 1,569 | 49.21% | 85 | 154 | 119 | 92 | 135 | 100 | 105 | 128 | 170 | 186 | 176 | 119 | |
| Total ADA Lawsuits Filed in 2024 | 3,188 | 100% | 221 | 278 | 286 | 233 | 260 | 232 | 248 | 270 | 286 | 309 | 286 | 279 | |
Top 5 Plaintiffs
440 Cases – 13.80%
Top 10 Plaintiffs
707 Cases – 22.18%
Top 20 Plaintiffs
1,129 Cases – 35.41%
Top 50 Plaintiffs
2,004 Cases – 62.86%
Overview of Plaintiff Activity in 2024
- A total of 231 plaintiffs filed 3,188 ADA website lawsuits in 2024.
- A small group of 35 plaintiffs were responsible for 1,619 lawsuits (50.78%), showcasing a high concentration of filings by a few repeat plaintiffs.
- The remaining 196 plaintiffs collectively filed 1,569 lawsuits (49.22%), reflecting a more distributed filing pattern among other litigants.
Most Active Plaintiffs
The top plaintiffs based on the total number of lawsuits filed:
- Victor Ariza – 113 lawsuits
- Nelson Fernandez – 89 lawsuits
- Jessica Karim – 85 lawsuits
- Julie Dalton – 79 lawsuits
- Oscar Herrera – 74 lawsuits
These five plaintiffs filed a combined total of 440 lawsuits, accounting for over 13.8% of all ADA lawsuits in 2024.
Monthly Highlights
- The highest number of lawsuits were filed in October (309 lawsuits), while the lowest filings were recorded in January (221 lawsuits).
- Jessica Karim filed the most lawsuits in a single month, with 25 lawsuits in April.
Open legal questions:
Are some plaintiffs actually working as testers in disguise or are their claims of a broad range of website inaccessibility legitimate?
Are many such plaintiffs who receive benefits such as Social Security Disability payments, bonafide customers, and are they reporting the serial nature of income they receive from their prolific and constant legal actions?
15 Law Firms Filed Over 86% ADA Lawsuits in 2024
| Plaintiff Firm Name | Total Lawsuits | Percentage | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stein Saks, PLLC | 428 | 13.43% | 45 | 38 | 46 | 36 | 43 | 44 | 49 | 29 | 20 | 14 | 25 | 39 |
| Gottlieb & Associates | 417 | 13.08% | 12 | 35 | 25 | 9 | 21 | 20 | 21 | 60 | 53 | 52 | 54 | 55 |
| Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. | 309 | 9.69% | 15 | 23 | 25 | 30 | 22 | 24 | 29 | 30 | 27 | 34 | 20 | 30 |
| Manning Law, APC | 268 | 8.41% | 21 | 32 | 24 | 23 | 11 | 7 | 13 | 20 | 34 | 23 | 36 | 24 |
| Gabriel A. Levy, P.C. | 249 | 7.81% | 15 | 11 | 13 | 33 | 19 | 26 | 33 | 6 | 33 | 25 | 20 | 15 |
| Mars Khaimov Law, PLLC | 186 | 5.83% | 25 | 36 | 55 | 27 | 33 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 9 | 0 |
| Pacific Trial Attorneys, APC | 147 | 4.61% | 14 | 21 | 25 | 7 | 31 | 10 | 16 | 13 | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Mendez Law Offices, PLLC | 133 | 4.17% | 5 | 12 | 17 | 11 | 18 | 12 | 11 | 9 | 10 | 15 | 5 | 8 |
| Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC | 130 | 4.08% | 5 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 9 | 15 | 28 | 47 | 11 | 0 |
| NYE Stirling, Hale & Miller, LLP | 120 | 3.76% | 11 | 20 | 0 | 21 | 10 | 2 | 7 | 22 | 16 | 8 | 0 | 3 |
| Throndset Michenfelder Law Office, LLC | 111 | 3.48% | 6 | 7 | 7 | 10 | 6 | 12 | 7 | 12 | 9 | 12 | 9 | 14 |
| Shaked Law Group, P.C | 72 | 2.26% | 12 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 8 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 9 | 5 | 3 |
| Horowitz Law, PLLC | 72 | 2.26% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 9 | 12 | 3 | 13 | 9 | 15 | 9 |
| Mizrahi Kroub LLP | 65 | 2.04% | 12 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 9 | 0 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 4 |
| J. Courtney Cunningham, PLLC | 59 | 1.85% | 8 | 3 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 14 | 0 | 6 | 6 | 12 |
| Top 15 Law Firms Filed 2,766 of Total ADA Lawsuits | 2,766 | 86.76% | 206 | 254 | 246 | 220 | 239 | 183 | 220 | 244 | 260 | 260 | 218 | 216 |
| 35 Law Firms Collectively Filed 422 Lawsuits | 422 | 13.24% | 15 | 24 | 40 | 13 | 21 | 49 | 28 | 26 | 26 | 49 | 68 | 63 |
| Total 50 Law Firms Filed 3188 Lawsuits | 3,188 | 100% | 221 | 278 | 286 | 233 | 260 | 232 | 248 | 270 | 286 | 309 | 286 | 279 |
Top 5 Plaintiffs
Lawsuits: 1,671
Percentage: 52.42%
Top 10 plaintiff Firms
Lawsuits: 2,387
Percentage: 74.87%
Top 15 plaintiff Firms
Lawsuits: 2,766
Percentage: 86.76%
Concentration of Lawsuits
- The top 15 firms filed 2766 lawsuits accounting for 86.76% of all lawsuits filed in 2024. This concentration highlights that ADA litigation remains dominated by a select group of legal representatives who specialize in accessibility cases.
- The activity of firms like Stein Saks, PLLC (13.43%) and Gottlieb & Associates (13.08%) demonstrates their prominent involvement in ADA enforcement.
Firm-Specific Trends
- Stein Saks, PLLC was the most active firm in 2024, filing 428 lawsuits, making them the leading filer of ADA website accessibility cases. This high filing volume demonstrates their significant role in ADA litigation.
However, the firm faced judicial scrutiny during the year. In the case of Zinnamon v. Satya Jewelry II, LLC, the Southern District of New York (SDNY) sanctioned Stein Saks, PLLC for filing lawsuits with insufficiently supported standing allegations. The court noted that, despite prior warnings, the firm continued to submit cases without adequate legal foundations, leading to a $1,000 sanction. This decision reflects growing frustration among courts with repetitive and poorly substantiated ADA filings.
While their high filing volume signals aggressive litigation activity, such incidents highlight the increasing scrutiny faced by firms engaged in high-frequency ADA lawsuits. This serves as a cautionary tale for law firms to ensure due diligence in their filings and for businesses to proactively address accessibility compliance to avoid similar legal challenges.
- Gottlieb & Associates, while second overall, exhibited notable activity in August, filing 60 lawsuits in a single month, the highest monthly filing by any firm.
Consistency vs. Spikes
- Some firms, like Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A., maintained a steady filing rate throughout the year, while others, such as Gottlieb & Associates, concentrated their filings in specific months. This could reflect strategic timing or the resolution of multiple cases in a short span.
Jurisdictional Implications
- Many of these top firms are known for filing in plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions such as New York, Florida, and California, which likely influenced their filing patterns.
Why This Matters
Understanding the activity of these firms is crucial for businesses and stakeholders. It highlights:
- The legal risks of non-compliance with ADA standards.
- The importance of proactive website accessibility measures to reduce the likelihood of litigation, especially in states frequently targeted by these firms.
Stay Updated on ADA lawsuits!
Subscribe to our newsletter and receive the latest blog updates and ADA lawsuit reports directly to your inbox!
11 Industries Faced Over 90% ADA Lawsuits in 2024
The data below provides highlights of critical insights into how ADA website lawsuits targeted specific industries in 2024.
| Industry Category | Total Lawsuits | Percentage | Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lifestyle, Fashion, Clothing & Apparel | 1,121 | 35.16% | 64 | 76 | 83 | 94 | 92 | 108 | 100 | 83 | 113 | 116 | 120 | 72 |
| Restaurant, Food, Drinks & Beverages | 758 | 23.78% | 62 | 75 | 66 | 54 | 66 | 38 | 49 | 75 | 58 | 75 | 67 | 73 |
| Beauty, Skin & Body Care | 250 | 7.84% | 11 | 21 | 20 | 20 | 12 | 25 | 19 | 17 | 18 | 31 | 18 | 38 |
| Medical & Health | 159 | 4.99% | 17 | 5 | 9 | 6 | 11 | 9 | 12 | 13 | 12 | 19 | 19 | 27 |
| Furniture, Lighting, Home Decor & Kitchen Accessories | 156 | 4.89% | 12 | 18 | 15 | 11 | 12 | 0 | 15 | 16 | 16 | 14 | 12 | 15 |
| Entertainment, Musical Instruments & Accessories | 98 | 3.07% | 2 | 6 | 18 | 9 | 9 | 5 | 8 | 10 | 12 | 9 | 7 | 3 |
| Retail & Consumer Goods | 75 | 2.35% | 7 | 15 | 21 | 2 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 10 |
| Home, Kitchen Appliances & Accessories | 74 | 2.32% | 3 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 8 | 10 | 6 | 10 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 9 |
| Fitness & Sports Accessories | 67 | 2.10% | 3 | 5 | 9 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 12 | 5 | 7 | 7 | 3 |
| Educational, Media, News & Magazines | 63 | 1.98% | 5 | 18 | 6 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| Travel, Hotels & Hospitality | 60 | 1.88% | 8 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 0 | 2 | 6 | 9 | 8 | 3 |
| 11 Industries Faced 2881 ADA Website Lawsuits | 2,881 | 90.37% | 194 | 251 | 256 | 214 | 231 | 204 | 219 | 246 | 256 | 289 | 267 | 254 |
| 13 Industries Faced 307 ADA Website Lawsuits | 307 | 9.63% | 27 | 27 | 30 | 19 | 29 | 28 | 29 | 24 | 30 | 20 | 19 | 25 |
| Total 23 Industries Faced 3188 ADA Website Lawsuits | 3,188 | 100.00% | 221 | 278 | 286 | 233 | 260 | 232 | 248 | 270 | 286 | 309 | 286 | 279 |
This data highlights the critical need for accessibility compliance, especially in industries that depend heavily on e-commerce and customer engagement. Businesses in sectors like retail, dining, and personal care are at the highest risk of litigation due to persistent accessibility barriers.
Prioritizing website accessibility is not just about meeting legal requirements—it’s about creating an inclusive digital experience for all users. Taking proactive measures to address accessibility can significantly reduce legal risks while fostering trust and loyalty among customers. This section serves as a vital resource for identifying vulnerable industries and motivating businesses to act before accessibility issues result in costly lawsuits.
Concentration of Lawsuits
- The top 11 industries faced 2,881 lawsuits, accounting for 90.37% of the total lawsuits filed in 2024.
- This concentration suggests that ADA litigation remains heavily focused on specific business sectors, reflecting persistent accessibility issues in these industries.
Most Targeted Industry
- Lifestyle, Fashion, Clothing & Apparel emerged as the most targeted industry, with 1,121 lawsuits (35.16%). This highlights a significant focus on retail and fashion websites, likely due to their widespread consumer base and frequent accessibility issues such as navigation barriers and incompatible screen reader functionality.
Other Highly Targeted Industries
- The Restaurant, Food, Drinks & Beverages sector ranked second with 758 lawsuits (23.78%), indicating ongoing challenges in providing accessible online ordering and menu features.
- Beauty, Skin & Body Care (250 lawsuits), Medical & Health (159 lawsuits), and Furniture, Lighting, Home Decor & Kitchen Accessories (156 lawsuits) followed, showing a diverse range of industries affected by ADA compliance issues.
22.65% ADA Lawsuits Filed Against Websites with an Accessibility Widget
Chart Description
The bar chart compares monthly ADA lawsuits filed in 2023 (blue) and 2024 (red) against websites with accessibility widgets.
Monthly Highlights:
- 2023 filings peaked in August (122) with consistent levels throughout the year.
- 2024 filings were generally lower, except for a strong finish in December (76), surpassing 2023.
This visual emphasizes year-over-year trends and the impact of accessibility widgets on lawsuits.
Overview of Accessibility Widget-Related Lawsuits:
Accessibility widgets, marketed as solutions to improve website compliance with accessibility standards, remain under significant legal scrutiny.
In 2024, 722 lawsuits were filed against websites using accessibility widgets, accounting for 22.65% of all ADA website lawsuits. This represents a slight decrease compared to 2023, which saw 929 lawsuits (24.05%) out of 3,862 total lawsuits.
Lawsuits against websites using the following accessibility widgets in 2024:
- accessiBe: 258 lawsuits (8.10% of total lawsuits)
- UserWay: 187 lawsuits (5.87%)
- AudioEye: 60 lawsuits (1.88%)
- Accessibly: 42 lawsuits (1.32%)
- UsableNet: 29 lawsuits (0.91%)
Reasons for the Decrease in Widget-Related Lawsuits
The drop in widget-related lawsuits in 2024 can be attributed to several factors:
- Increased Awareness: More businesses are becoming educated about the limitations of accessibility widgets, understanding that these tools cannot guarantee full compliance with ADA or WCAG standards.
- Exposed Widget Ineffectiveness: Lawsuits and public discussions have shed light on the reality that widgets, despite their marketing claims, often fail to address fundamental accessibility barriers. This has likely discouraged businesses from relying solely on widgets.
- Legal and Regulatory Pressures: The Federal Trade Commission (FTC)’s enforcement action against accessiBe, an accessibility widget company in 2024, which resulted in a $1 million fine, sent a strong message to the industry. The FTC penalized the company for making false claims about its product’s ability to ensure ADA compliance, emphasizing the need for businesses to adopt reliable and holistic accessibility practices.
Key Takeaways for Businesses:
- Relying solely on widgets is risky: The limitations of tools like accessiBe and UserWay have been exposed through lawsuits and regulatory actions.
- FTC’s $1 Million Fine: The FTC’s proposed enforcement action against accessiBe in 2024 reinforces the need for transparency in marketing claims and highlights the risks of over-reliance on automated tools.
- Adopt a holistic approach: Businesses must prioritize manual audits, WCAG-compliant development, and a user-first approach to accessibility.
By addressing accessibility beyond widgets, businesses can reduce legal exposure and build trust with all users, ensuring compliance and inclusivity in their digital presence.
ADA Website Lawsuits Filed by Website Platform
Lawsuits against websites using the following platforms in 2024:
SHOPIFY
Shopify is a leading e-commerce platform that empowers businesses of all sizes to build, customize, and manage their online stores with ease. Known for its robust app ecosystem and seamless user interface, Shopify remains a top choice for merchants worldwide.
Lawsuits: 1,014
Percentage: 31.81%
WordPress
WordPress is a content management system (CMS) that serves as a versatile tool for building websites, blogs, and e-commerce stores. Its extensive plugin ecosystem and customization options attract a wide user base.
Lawsuits: 603
Percentage: 18.91%
MAGENTO
Magento specializes in e-commerce, offering robust tools for catalog management, shopping cart systems, and marketing features. It is favored by businesses with advanced e-commerce needs.
Lawsuits: 100
Percentage: 3.14%
Squarespace
Squarespace is a website builder designed for ease of use, offering pre-designed templates and built-in features to help users create professional websites with minimal effort.
Lawsuits: 87
Percentage: 2.73%
Wix
Wix is a user-friendly platform that allows individuals and small businesses to create customizable websites using drag-and-drop features and built-in accessibility tools.
Lawsuits: 52
Percentage: 1.63
OTHER CUSTOM CODED WEBSITES
Custom-coded websites are bespoke platforms designed to meet specific needs, offering full control and flexibility. However, they often face accessibility challenges due to inconsistent compliance practices.
Lawsuits: 1,332
Percentage: 41.78%
We fix website accessibility at the code level using WCAG and the latest usability best practices to comply with ADA and EAA requirements.
Year in Review:
Key Developments in ADA Website Accessibility
DOJ Final Rule on Web and Mobile Accessibility Under Title II:
In April 2024, the Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a groundbreaking rule under Title II of the ADA, requiring state and local governments to ensure their websites and mobile applications are accessible to individuals with disabilities. This rule adopts the WCAG 2.1 Level AA standards as the benchmark for accessibility, addressing barriers in digital content to promote inclusivity.
Key Deadlines:
- Public entities serving 50,000 or more residents must comply by April 2026
- Smaller public entities have until April 2027 to achieve compliance.
Scope of the Rule: This rule applies to all digital content and mobile apps provided by state and local governments, including those managed by third parties. Essential services such as online payments, public meeting participation, and access to records are included, ensuring that individuals with disabilities can fully engage with these resources.
Encouragement for Businesses and Website Owners: Although the rule specifically targets state and local governments, it serves as a clear signal for businesses and private website owners to prioritize accessibility. Making your online presence accessible not only helps avoid legal risks but also ensures inclusivity for all users, including individuals with disabilities.
With the DOJ emphasizing compliance, now is the time to assess your digital platforms, adopt WCAG 2.1 standards, and work with accessibility experts to create a welcoming and accessible online environment for everyone.
The DOJ under 47. It remains to be seen what the new Trump administration and DOJ leadership will do with this rule considering the significant cost in the tens of billions of dollars for upgrading websites for over 95,000 public entities and their technology providers. We can anticipate that there will be some discussion on cost, technology advancements, and increasing accessibility through AI.
European Accessibility Act (EAA): A Call to Action for Accessibility:
The EAA’s importance lies in its ability to break down barriers for individuals with disabilities, creating equal opportunities and fostering inclusivity across the digital landscape. For businesses, this is not only a legal obligation but a significant opportunity to broaden their audience and build brand loyalty. Failure to comply can result in fines and reputational damage, making it critical for organizations to act now. Adopting accessibility standards ensures legal compliance while contributing to a more inclusive society.
HB21-1110: Colorado’s Accessibility Initiative:
Colorado’s House Bill 21-1110 (HB21-1110) mandates that all state and local government websites adhere to WCAG 2.1 standards to ensure accessibility for individuals with disabilities. Agencies were required to submit accessibility plans by July 2022 and achieve compliance by July 2024, with an extended deadline of July 2025 for those demonstrating good-faith efforts.
This legislation highlights the growing focus on digital accessibility at the state level, serving as an example for other jurisdictions. While it primarily targets government entities, it sends a strong message to private businesses about the importance of accessibility. Organizations should proactively adopt these standards to align with best practices, avoid potential legal risks, and contribute to a more inclusive digital world.
WCAG and Its Role in Accessibility Lawsuits:
Although the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) are not codified into law for Title III (public accommodations), they have become the de facto standard referenced in most website accessibility lawsuits. Plaintiffs and their attorneys frequently cite WCAG violations as evidence of non-compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), arguing that failing to meet these guidelines results in barriers for individuals with disabilities. Courts often rely on WCAG as a benchmark for determining whether a website provides equal access, despite the absence of a legal mandate. This widespread reliance on WCAG highlights the importance of adhering to these guidelines to reduce legal exposure and ensure accessibility.
California AB 1757:
Dead for Now, But Could Resurface in 2025
California’s AB 1757, the highly debated website accessibility bill, failed to gain traction in its various attempts during the 2023-2024 legislative sessions. For now, the bill is dead—but there is speculation that it could be reintroduced in 2025 under a new bill by sponsors, raising fresh concerns for businesses and the accessibility landscape. EcomBack raised the alarm and advocated to Stop AB 1757 at the grass roots level.
The Promise vs. Reality of AB 1757
Proposed as a measure to enhance website accessibility and provide businesses with a “presumption of defense” in lawsuits, AB 1757 fell short in several critical areas:
- Creating WCAG as a standard:The bill left the burden to businesses to meet WCAG standards in an absolute way, even when most of its sponsors failed to meet them. The bill failed to create safeguards, or actionable guidelines and compliance processes.
- No Protection Against Lawsuit Abuse:AB 1757 did little to address the growing issue of predatory lawsuits targeting small businesses under the guise of accessibility. Without robust safeguards, the bill risked exacerbating this problem by allowing crafty lawyers to increase the pool of defendants in profitable lawsuits.
- Disproportionate Burden on Small Businesses:Many small businesses voiced concerns over the financial and operational challenges posed by the bill. Without offering resources, grants, or tax credits, the legislation became another potential cost burden for struggling enterprises. For a state that is known to be adverse to business to begin with, this bill ensured that technology companies, small business website services providers, and businesses with websites would be targets.
What Happens Next?
While AB 1757 is off the table for now, its underlying issues remain pressing. The rise of website accessibility lawsuits, often driven by a small number of law firms, continues to put businesses at risk. There is growing anticipation that the bill—or a similar version—will return in the 2025 legislative session.
What Should Businesses Do?
Even without AB 1757, businesses in California remain vulnerable under existing laws like the Unruh Civil Rights Act and the ADA. To mitigate risks and promote inclusivity, businesses should take proactive steps:
- Conduct Accessibility Audits: Evaluate your website against WCAG 2.1 or 2.2 standards to identify and resolve barriers.
- Invest in Accessibility Remediation: Fix known issues, such as missing alt text, improper labels, and navigation barriers, to ensure usability for all visitors.
- Stay Informed: Keep an eye on legislative developments, as new proposals could impact compliance obligations.
Conclusion
The failure of AB 1757 underscores the challenges of balancing accessibility enforcement with realistic business expectations. If the bill is reintroduced in 2025, California’s legislators must address its shortcomings by including clear compliance pathways, protections against lawsuit abuse, and support for businesses working toward accessibility.
Until then, businesses should take accessibility seriously—not just to avoid legal risks but to ensure they are building inclusive digital spaces for everyone.
Emerging Legal Risks for Businesses in 2025:
Privacy and Compliance
1. The Rise of “Trap and Trace” Lawsuits:
A new wave of class-action lawsuits targeting business websites has emerged, focusing on privacy violations and data collection practices. These lawsuits, often referred to as “Trap and Trace” lawsuits, allege that websites collecting user data are in violation of California Penal Code Sections 638.51, 638.50(c), and 637.2.
Key Allegations:
- Storing user IP addresses without consent.
- Collecting user data or transmitting it via tracking pixels to third parties, such as Google, Facebook, and TikTok.
- Website owners, often unaware of these processes, are being held liable.
Potential Impact:
- Penalties of up to $5,000 per incident, where every website user can be considered an “incident.”
- Class-action certification could result in significant financial exposure for businesses.
- Legal defense costs alone can be substantial, even if the cases lack merit
Current Legal Developments
At least two federal courts, including the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California and the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, have allowed these lawsuits to move forward. These decisions have opened the door for an increase in filings, placing businesses at heightened legal risk.
Recommendations and Preventive Measures for Businesses:
- Proactively review and modify websites to ensure compliance with privacy and data collection laws by using apps such as Consentmo and Cookie Yes. Read our blog on Privacy Compliance.
- Remove or limit tracking tools, such as pixels, that collect user data without clear consent.
- Consult with legal and technical experts to implement preventive measures and reduce the risk of litigation.
- Implement clear policies and practices for data handling and consent.
2. Corporate Transparency Act (CTA): Postponed Compliance Requirements:
The Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), enacted in 2023, introduced new requirements for businesses to file Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) forms with the Federal Treasury Department. However, recent legal developments have temporarily postponed these obligations.
Key Updates:
- The compliance deadline was extended from January 1, 2025, to January 13, 2025.
- On December 26, 2024, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas issued a nationwide preliminary injunction, blocking enforcement of the CTA. The court ruled that the law infringed on states’ rights to regulate businesses, deeming it an unconstitutional overreach.
Uncertainty Around the CTA:
- The injunction is not a final determination of the law’s constitutionality
- The Treasury Department is appealing the ruling, leaving the future of BOI requirements unclear.
Advice for Businesses:
- Monitor updates on the CTA and BOI requirements to ensure timely compliance if reinstated.
- Non-compliance with BOI filing requirements could result in penalties once enforcement resumes.
Business Risks and Compliance Strategies:
The emergence of privacy-focused lawsuits and evolving compliance obligations reflects an increasingly complex legal landscape for businesses. These developments underscore the importance of proactive strategies to manage legal risks:
- Website Compliance: Beyond ADA standards, ensure adherence to privacy laws, including managing user data collection and consent practices.
- Monitoring Legal Changes: Stay updated on court rulings and regulatory updates that impact compliance obligations.
- Consulting Experts: Work with legal and technical advisors to implement solutions that mitigate risks from emerging legal challenges.
By addressing these issues proactively, businesses can avoid costly lawsuits and foster trust with users, ensuring legal and ethical compliance in an evolving digital environment.
Blind Sighted - a documentary on web accessibility supported by EcomBack
When an unexpected lawsuit hit our company’s founder, it showed him a shocking truth: many e-commerce websites, including his own, weren’t fully accessible.
This was the beginning of a journey to tell an exploratory story about how access to digital accessibility is still such a challenge for those of us with disabilities and a great risk for unaware businesses, who are easy targets for exploitation by plaintiff lawyers.
Supreme Court: Acheson Hotels v. Laufer and Its Impact on ADA Website Lawsuits
In December 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the case of Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, which involved Deborah Laufer, a self-proclaimed ADA “tester” plaintiff. Laufer filed numerous lawsuits against hotels, alleging that their websites failed to provide sufficient accessibility information required under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The case raised a critical question: Do “tester” plaintiffs, who may not have an intent to use the business’s services, have legal standing to file ADA claims?
However, the Supreme Court dismissed the case as moot after Laufer withdrew her lawsuit, following her attorney’s suspension from practicing law. This left unresolved the broader question of “tester” standing in ADA lawsuits. The Court also vacated the lower court’s ruling, which had recognized tester standing.
Impact on ADA Website Lawsuits
- Legal Uncertainty Persists:The Supreme Court’s decision did not resolve the split among circuit courts regarding “tester” standing. Some circuits continue to allow such cases, while others do not. This ongoing ambiguity leaves businesses uncertain about the legitimacy of lawsuits from “tester” plaintiffs.
- Reduction in Tester-Led Filings: The publicity around the case and the suspension of Laufer’s attorney may have discouraged other “tester” plaintiffs and attorneys from pursuing similar lawsuits, contributing to the decline in ADA website lawsuits in 2024.
- Focus Shift: The dismissal has likely shifted focus from federal-level “tester” cases to other types of ADA claims, such as demand letters and state court filings, as these are less impacted by standing debates.
- Risk for Businesses Remains: Businesses must remain proactive in ensuring website accessibility, as the lack of a definitive ruling means “tester” lawsuits could still be pursued in circuits that recognize such standing.
While the Supreme Court avoided a definitive decision, the case has influenced ADA litigation trends, particularly by slowing the wave of “tester” lawsuits at the federal level. However, the legal landscape remains complex, underscoring the importance of compliance with ADA standards.
Accessibility Widgets Under Scrutiny:
Legal and Regulatory Developments
FTC Action Against accessiBe for Misleading Accessibility Claims:
In a significant development for the digital accessibility landscape, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action against accessiBe, a company that markets AI-powered web accessibility solutions. accessiBe claimed that its product, accessWidget, could automatically make websites fully compliant with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Source
However, the FTC found these claims to be misleading and unsubstantiated. The company allegedly created a false sense of assurance among businesses, many of whom relied solely on the tool to meet their legal obligations. When businesses discovered that the product did not deliver the promised level of compliance, they faced potential legal risks and reputational harm.
Key Details of the Case:
- FTC Findings: accessiBe misrepresented its AI tool’s capabilities and failed to deliver true accessibility compliance.
- Marketing Violations: The company did not disclose material connections to online reviewers, presenting paid endorsements as independent reviews.
- Settlement: accessiBe reached a $1 million settlement with the FTC, highlighting the financial consequences of deceptive practices.
Impact on ADA Lawsuits: According to EcomBack’s report, a total of 722 ADA lawsuits were filed in 2024 against websites that had an accessibility widget installed. Among these, 258 websites used accessiBe’s accessWidget, making it the most frequently cited widget in these lawsuits. accessiBe ranks at the top of the list of accessibility widget providers whose implementations resulted in legal action.
Broader Implications: This case underscores the complexity of achieving true digital accessibility. While AI tools like accessWidget can assist in identifying accessibility issues, they cannot replace manual testing and expert reviews. Businesses are encouraged to critically evaluate such tools and seek expert guidance to ensure compliance.
In the context of ADA website lawsuits, this case serves as a stark reminder of the growing scrutiny over digital accessibility solutions and the legal and financial risks associated with non-compliance or reliance on misleading claims.
accessiBe was also sued in SDNY by a client for misrepresentation
The class action lawsuit filed earlier this summer, alleges that AccessiBe misrepresented its software products by stating that they could fully ensure ADA compliance for online accessibility. Despite using the widget, Tribeca Skin Center was sued for having an inaccessible site. Read our blog for more information on this case.
SDNY Chief Judge Rules ADA Does Not Cover Online-Only Businesses:
In Mejia v. High Brew Coffee Inc., Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain of the Southern District of New York (SDNY) dismissed an ADA website accessibility lawsuit, ruling that the ADA does not apply to businesses operating exclusively online without a physical location.
This decision diverges from prior SDNY rulings that extended ADA coverage to online-only businesses, potentially influencing the trajectory of future website accessibility lawsuits in federal courts.
The ruling may prompt plaintiffs to pursue such cases in state courts, seeking favorable interpretations of accessibility laws.
This development underscores the ongoing legal debate over the ADA’s applicability to digital-only platforms and could significantly impact the landscape of website accessibility litigation. Source
Stein Saks, PLLC: Top Filer and Legal Controversies in 2024:
Stein Saks, PLLC Leads ADA Website Lawsuit Filings: As per EcomBack’s research, a total of 3,188 ADA website lawsuits were filed in 2024. Stein Saks, PLLC accounted for 428 lawsuits, representing 13.43% of all filings. This makes Stein Saks the top filer of ADA website lawsuits for the year.
Key Highlights
- Sanctioned by the Court: Stein Saks, PLLC faced judicial penalties, including a $1,000 sanction for filing claims deemed insufficiently supported, reflecting growing court scrutiny of their practices.
- Dominant Presence: The firm filed over 13% of all ADA website lawsuits, cementing its position as a leading filer in website accessibility litigation.
- RICO Lawsuit: Stein Saks, PLLC and its founders, Judah Stein and Yaakov Saks, were named in a RICO lawsuit filed by Experian Information Solutions, Inc., alleging fraudulent activities such as fabricating evidence and extorting settlements under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
Implications for the Industry
The sanctions against Stein Saks PLLC highlight the judiciary’s focus on addressing potential misuse of ADA litigation. While the firm’s high filing volume demonstrates the continuing prevalence of website accessibility lawsuits, it also raises questions about ethical practices and the quality of claims being brought to court.
Sanctions Highlight Judicial Scrutiny:
In a notable case, Zinnamon v. Satya Jewelry II, LLC, filed in the Southern District of New York (SDNY), Stein Saks, PLLC faced sanctions for inadequate legal practices. The court found that the lawsuit, which alleged ADA violations due to website inaccessibility, failed to adequately establish the plaintiff’s standing. Despite previous warnings in similar cases, Stein Saks continued to file complaints with insufficient legal and factual basis.
As a result, the court imposed a $1,000 sanction on attorney Mark Rozenberg of Stein Saks, PLLC. This sanction reflects the judiciary’s growing frustration with what it perceives as repetitive and poorly substantiated ADA filings. The ruling underscores the need for law firms to ensure due diligence when pursuing such litigation.
RICO Lawsuit by Experian against Stein Saks, PLLC:
Adding to its legal controversies, Stein Saks, PLLC was named as a defendant in a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) lawsuit filed by Experian Information Solutions, Inc. in June 2024. The lawsuit alleged that Stein Saks engaged in fraudulent activities, including fabricating evidence and submitting false claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
Key Allegations:
- Recruitment of plaintiffs and manufacturing fake credit denial letters to support fraudulent claims.
- Collaboration with individuals such as Chesky Monk, Yenon Argy, and attorney Justin Zeig of Zeig Law, who were allegedly involved in creating and filing fraudulent lawsuits.
- Profiting from fabricated lawsuits, causing Experian to incur millions in financial losses, reputational harm, and legal expenses.
Experian’s complaint accuses Stein Saks founders, Judah Stein and Yaakov Saks, of leading a coordinated effort to extort settlements using fabricated evidence. This lawsuit further highlights a pattern of questionable legal practices that extend beyond ADA cases, raising broader concerns about ethical standards in their litigation approach. Read more about this case.
Conclusion
Stein Saks, PLLC’s high filing volume reflects the continued prevalence of ADA lawsuits, but their involvement in multiple legal controversies raises serious concerns about the ethical integrity of their practices. These developments emphasize the need for due diligence, both in the pursuit of accessibility litigation and in businesses’ efforts to ensure compliance to avoid legal risks. For businesses, adopting a proactive approach to accessibility compliance remains the most effective strategy to address the challenges of this complex and evolving legal landscape.
Methodology
This report is based on extensive research and analysis of data sourced from PACER, state court websites, and CourtLink, comprehensive databases for tracking lawsuits filed in courts across the United States. The data analyzed covers the period from January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2024, providing insights into trends, key players, and critical developments in ADA website accessibility litigation.
It is important to note that some lawsuits may not have been included in this report due to delays in data updates. As such, the total number of lawsuits reported in this analysis may differ slightly from the final numbers as they appear in future database updates.
Our methodology prioritizes accuracy and relevance, aiming to provide businesses, legal professionals, and stakeholders with actionable insights into the evolving ADA website litigation landscape. By identifying trends and highlighting key areas of focus, this report serves as a valuable resource for understanding and addressing accessibility compliance challenges.
EcomBack - Your Partner in ADA Compliance
At EcomBack, we specialize in helping businesses navigate the complexities of ADA compliance. With years of expertise in web accessibility and a deep understanding of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines), we empower businesses to create websites that are inclusive, compliant, and legally protected.
Our ADA Compliance Services
We provide a comprehensive suite of accessibility solutions, tailored to your unique business needs:
Website Accessibility Audits
Identify barriers to accessibility with our detailed audits, highlighting areas that need improvement to meet ADA and WCAG standards.
Remediation Services
From fixing code to redesigning website elements, we ensure your site meets accessibility standards.
Accessibility Training
Equip your team with the knowledge to maintain compliance with ongoing education and guidance.
Ongoing Monitoring & Maintenance
Stay compliant with continuous testing, updates, and support as web standards evolve.
PDF and Document Accessibility
Ensure all your digital documents are accessible to everyone.
Accessibility Statement Creation
Provide transparency to users by clearly outlining your commitment to accessibility.
Why Choose EcomBack?
Proven Expertise: Our team has successfully helped businesses across industries achieve and maintain compliance.
Customized Solutions: We tailor our services to your specific platform, whether you use Shopify, WordPress, Magento, or custom-coded websites.
Proactive Approach: We don’t just fix issues—we help you implement ongoing strategies to prevent future lawsuits.
Cutting-Edge Tools: We leverage the latest technology and manual testing methods to ensure your website is accessible to all users.
Exclusive Offer: Get a FREE Accessibility Audit
We understand the importance of accessibility, and we’re committed to helping businesses take the first step. That’s why we’re offering a FREE Website Accessibility Audit to help you identify potential compliance issues.
With our free audit, you’ll receive:
- A detailed analysis of your website’s accessibility gaps.
- Actionable recommendations for achieving ADA and WCAG compliance.
- Insights into reducing legal risks and improving user experience.
Take Action Today
Don’t wait until it’s too late. Ensuring your website is ADA-compliant is not just a legal requirement—it’s a commitment to inclusivity and equal access for all users. By partnering with EcomBack, you can protect your business while creating a better online experience for your audience.
Disclaimer: The contents of this report are provided for informational purposes only. The data and insights presented are based on our observations and interpretations, and while we strive for accuracy, we cannot guarantee the completeness or reliability of the information. For detailed terms and conditions regarding our content, please refer to our Website Content Disclaimer.
