W.D. Pa. · No. 2:26-cv-02182
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HUDSON VALLEY LIGHTING, INC.source ↗ filed by East End Trial Group LLC · No. 2:26-cv-02182 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $65K–$780K ▾Lowell v. Lyft shows ADA website/accessibility claims can be dismissed if plaintiff fails to prove proposed modifications are effective, while Holmes v. Bax shows ADA claims often survive summary judgment when paired with other statutory violations. Outcome is fact-dependent on whether plaintiff pleads a concrete barrier and remedy. Comparable settlements $65K–$780K median $365K · n=4 The Container Stor $780K · Covenant Retiremen $530K · Association of Apa $200K Key precedent: Lowell v. Lyft (2d Cir.) - affirms that plaintiffs bear burden of proving effective modification, a common failure point in ADA accessibility suits like this one. Main risk: Dismissal for failure to plead a concrete, remediable barrier or standing issues, per Lowell v. Lyft's reasonableness/effectiveness requirement. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2K–$12K Single-defendant, no prior record, likely individual plaintiff case; settlement comparables are from much larger companies and may not be representative of recovery scale here. · grounded in 8 rulings, 4 settlements, 0 verdicts | Filing | ADA / Accessibility | W.D. Pa. | 2026-10-06 | $65K–$780K comparable settlements |