S.D.N.Y. · No. 1:26-cv-07498
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Uber Caffe, LLCsource ↗ filed by The Weitz Law Firm, P.A. · No. 1:26-cv-07498 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline → Case comparables ▾Comparables split: Lowell v. Lyft affirmed dismissal of ADA claims for failure to prove reasonable modification, while Holmes v. Bax and Price v. Diab affirmed ADA liability/relief. Outcomes turn heavily on fact-specific accommodation/effectiveness proof at pleading and summary judgment stages. Key precedent: Lowell v. Lyft (2d Cir.) is most relevant venue-wise (SDNY/2d Cir.) and shows plaintiffs must plead/prove modification effectiveness or face dismissal. Main risk: Dismissal for failure to plead a concrete, effective accommodation, as in Lowell v. Lyft where reasonableness inquiry failed at pleading stage Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $1K–$75K Web signals appear to describe Uber Technologies Inc., not the small named defendant; class-size and value estimates assume this is a single/small-plaintiff ADA accessibility suit against a local business, not a rideshare class action. · grounded in 7 rulings, 0 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | S.D.N.Y. | 2026-09-02 | $1K–$75K rough EV |