M.D. Fla. · No. 6:26-cv-02301
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A & M FOOTWEAR OUTLET, INC.source ↗ filed by Sconzo Law Office, P.A. · No. 6:26-cv-02301 · Americans with Disabilities Act · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $65K–$530K ▾ADA Title III accessibility suits against small retailers typically survive motions to dismiss if specific barriers are pled, as in Holmes v. Bax, but Lowell v. Lyft shows dismissal risk when plaintiff can't show proposed modifications are effective or feasible. Comparable settlements $65K–$530K median $200K · n=3 Covenant Retiremen $530K · Association of Apa $200K · Home Depot U.S.A., $65K Key precedent: Mary Holmes v. Jessica Bax — ADA claims affirmed at summary judgment, showing courts favor well-pled accessibility claims with concrete barrier allegations. Main risk: Plaintiff fails to demonstrate a concrete, remediable barrier or standing (repeat-visit intent), mirroring the effectiveness-burden problem in Lowell v. Lyft. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $3K–$16K Comparables are large enterprises; this defendant is a small single-location outlet, making settlement benchmarks and class-size framing weakly analogous. · grounded in 8 rulings, 3 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | M.D. Fla. | 2026-10-02 | $65K–$530K comparable settlements |