S.D.N.Y. · No. 1:26-cv-07493
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value Max Products, LLCsource ↗ filed by Gottlieb & Associates · No. 1:26-cv-07493 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline → Case comparables ▾Comparable rulings split: Lowell v. Lyft affirmed dismissal of ADA claims for lack of proof of reasonable modification, while Holmes v. Bax affirmed ADA violations for plaintiffs, showing outcome-dependent, fact-heavy standard. No prior record on this defendant increases uncertainty. Key precedent: Lowell v. Lyft (2d Cir.) — controlling S.D.N.Y./2d Cir. precedent placing heavy burden on plaintiffs to prove effective accommodation, a likely dismissal risk here. Main risk: Failure to plead/prove a reasonable, effective accessibility modification, as in Lowell v. Lyft, leading to dismissal. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): –$10M No settlement or verdict data for this defendant/theory; estimates rely on generic ADA accessibility litigation patterns and unverified class size. · grounded in 7 rulings, 0 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | S.D.N.Y. | 2026-09-01 | –$10M rough EV |