S.D.N.Y. · No. 1:26-cv-07296
Full docket on CourtListener ↗
No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).
| Matter | Type | Practice area | Court | Date | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Emulait Inc.source ↗ filed by Gottlieb & Associates · Judge Dale E. Ho · No. 1:26-cv-07296 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline → Case comparables ▾Only one closely on-point ADA ruling (Lowell v. Lyft) affirmed dismissal because plaintiffs failed to prove proposed accessibility fix was effective, showing courts scrutinize efficacy at pleading stage. Other comparables (SNAP/ECOA/wage cases) are only tangentially relevant, so predictive value is limited. Key precedent: Lowell v. Lyft, Inc. (2d Cir.) — shows 2d Cir. requires plaintiff to prove effectiveness of requested modification, a real dismissal risk for ADA web/app claims. Main risk: Dismissal for failure to plead an effective, reasonable accommodation, as in Lowell v. Lyft Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $22K–$1.12M Very small, mostly off-theory comparable set; no direct settlements or verdicts on this defendant or theory—treat as rough directional estimate only. · grounded in 6 rulings, 0 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | S.D.N.Y. | 2026-08-27 | $22K–$1.12M rough EV |