C.D. Cal. · No. 2:26-cv-09892
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California Auto, Inc.source ↗ filed by So Cal Equal Access Group · Judge Charles F. Eick · No. 2:26-cv-09892 · 42:12101 Americans With Disabilities Act · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $65K–$530K ▾Comparable rulings split evenly: Lowell v. Lyft affirmed dismissal of ADA claims for failure to prove reasonable modification, while Holmes v. Bax affirmed ADA violations for plaintiffs and Price v. Diab favored plaintiffs on fee-shifting after default. No physical-access or dealership-specific precedent directly on point. Comparable settlements $65K–$530K median $200K · n=3 Covenant Retiremen $530K · Association of Apa $200K · Home Depot U.S.A., $65K Key precedent: Lowell v. Lyft (2d Cir.) — shows courts scrutinize whether plaintiff can prove proposed accommodation is effective, a hurdle likely relevant to any accessibility claim against California Auto. Main risk: Dismissal for failure to plead a concrete, provably effective accommodation/modification, as in Lowell v. Lyft. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $40K–$250K Small, non-industry-specific comparable set; class size and defendant scope are estimated, not directly sourced, so figures are illustrative ranges only. · grounded in 7 rulings, 3 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | C.D. Cal. | 2026-09-03 | $65K–$530K comparable settlements |