S.D. Fla. · No. 1:26-cv-25880
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CarMax Enterprise Services, LLCsource ↗ filed by Mendez Law Offices, PLLC · Judge Kathleen Mary Williams · No. 1:26-cv-25880 · 42:12182 Americans with Disabilities Act · view case timeline → Case comparables ▾Comparables split: Lowell v. Lyft affirmed dismissal because plaintiffs failed to prove modification effectiveness, while Holmes v. Bax affirmed ADA claims for plaintiffs on summary judgment. CarMax accessibility suits (typically website/Title III) hinge on similar reasonableness and effectiveness proof issues. Key precedent: Lowell v. Lyft (2d Cir.) — shows courts require plaintiffs to prove proposed accommodation is effective, a common failure point in ADA accessibility pleadings. Main risk: Dismissal for failure to plead effective, concrete remediation (per Lowell v. Lyft reasoning) or mootness if CarMax remediates site before ruling (per Burton v. Chase Point). Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): –$20K No direct settlement or verdict data for CarMax ADA claims; estimate relies on general Title III litigation patterns, not case-specific facts or class actions. · grounded in 6 rulings, 0 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | S.D. Fla. | 2026-08-27 | –$20K rough EV |