S.D.N.Y. · No. 1:26-cv-07462
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Atelier Luxury Group, LLCsource ↗ filed by Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC · No. 1:26-cv-07462 · 42:12188 Americans With Disabilities Act - Civil Enforcement Actions · view case timeline → Case comparables ▾Second Circuit's Lowell v. Lyft affirmed dismissal where plaintiffs failed to prove proposed modifications were reasonable/effective, a controlling SDNY standard. Conversely, Holmes v. Bax shows ADA claims can survive summary judgment when well-pled, so outcome is fact-dependent. Key precedent: Lowell v. Lyft, Inc. (2d Cir.) — controlling in SDNY, sets high evidentiary bar for plaintiffs to prove reasonable accommodation effectiveness. Main risk: Dismissal for failure to prove proposed accessibility fix is reasonable/effective, as in Lowell v. Lyft. This defendant: Two prior ADA filings (Herrera, Ariza) against same defendant suggest recurring accessibility compliance gaps or serial-filer targeting. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): –$50K No settlement or verdict data for this theory; estimate relies on statutory analogues and small sample of mixed appellate rulings. · grounded in 7 rulings, 0 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | S.D.N.Y. | 2026-09-01 | –$50K rough EV |