← Daily briefing  ·  What cases settle for →

Consumer-Law Records

A searchable database of consumer-protection filings, settlements, and opinions — built by Public Vector's agents and growing every day. Filter by type, practice area, or defendant; sort settlements by value.

Clear

2,720 records · $65.30B in settlements

Defendant / matterTypePractice areaCourtDateValue / comps
Equifax Information Services, LLCsource ↗
filed by Hays Cauley PC · Judge Joseph Dawson III · No. 4:26-cv-03844 · 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M ▾
Analogous tracking-technology privacy claims split: Doe v. Bayhealth survived on breach of confidentiality, while Tower Health's Meta Pixel claim was dismissed with prejudice and Integris saw state claims left unclear. Equifax's scale and sensitive financial data cut both ways on standing and consent theories.
Comparable settlements $59.50M–$725M median $81.50M · n=10
Meta $725M · Google $425M · Google LLC $135M
Per member (realized): ~$29 median · $29–$29 (n=2)
Comparable verdict: Google LLC $425.70M · Google LLC $425.65M
Key precedent: Patrick Santoro v. Tower Health (3rd Cir.) — dismissal of Meta Pixel/tracking claim affirmed, showing courts skeptical of similar third-party disclosure theories absent concrete harm.
Main risk: Dismissal on pleadings/standing grounds as in Tower Health, or reclassification as routine FCRA dispute rather than wiretap violation
This defendant: Equifax has extensive FCRA litigation history including a $2.2M settlement, showing willingness to settle rather than litigate to verdict
Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $30M–$580M
Small n=2 realized-payout sample and cross-theory analogies (health/biometric tracking) limit precision; actual claim mechanics (wiretap vs. tracking tech) unspecified. · grounded in 8 rulings, 10 settlements, 4 verdicts
FilingPrivacy & WiretapD.S.C.2026-09-03$59.50M–$725M
comparable settlements
Credence Resource Management LLCsource ↗
Judge Gray M. Borden · No. 2:26-cv-01592 · 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act · view case timeline →
FilingPrivacy & WiretapN.D. Ala.2026-09-03
Zest Labs Inc.source ↗
filed by Shaked Law Group, P.C. · No. 1:26-cv-07561 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $65K–$530K ▾
Comparable rulings split: Lowell v. Lyft affirmed dismissal of ADA claims for lack of effective-modification proof, while Holmes v. Bax affirmed ADA violations at summary judgment; Billesdon reversed most disability claims but kept retaliation. No clear directional signal for a small defendant like Zest Labs.
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.) matters most — same circuit (S.D.N.Y. feeds 2d Cir.) and shows plaintiffs bear burden to prove reasonable modification, a frequent dismissal ground.
Main risk: Failure to plead/prove that requested accessibility modification is reasonable and effective, as in Lowell v. Lyft, leading to dismissal.
Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $20K–$125K
Extremely limited defendant-specific data; class size and per-member figures are rough proxies given sparse web signals and no prior litigation history. · grounded in 7 rulings, 3 settlements, 0 verdicts
FilingADA / AccessibilityS.D.N.Y.2026-09-03$65K–$530K
comparable settlements
Blue Corner, Inc.source ↗
filed by Barducci Law Firm PLLC · Judge Taryn A. Merkl · No. 1:26-cv-05476 · 42:1201 Civil Rights (Disability) · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $65K–$530K ▾
Comparable rulings split roughly evenly: Holmes v. Bax affirmed ADA violations while Lowell v. Lyft (2d Cir., controlling here) affirmed dismissal for failure to show effective modification. Billesdon shows ADA failure-to-accommodate claims often reversed on insufficient evidence, signaling merits risk beyond pleading stage.
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, Inc. (2d Cir.) — controlling circuit precedent affirming dismissal where plaintiff can't prove proposed accessibility fix is reasonable/effective.
Main risk: Failure to plead/prove an effective, reasonable accommodation, as in Lowell v. Lyft, leading to dismissal at pleading or summary judgment stage.
Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): –$250K
Defendant identity ambiguous from web signals (multiple unrelated 'Blue Corner' entities), undermining class-size and revenue-based inference; treat estimates as rough bounds only. · grounded in 7 rulings, 3 settlements, 0 verdicts
FilingADA / AccessibilityE.D.N.Y2026-09-03$65K–$530K
comparable settlements
K Four Realty LLCsource ↗
filed by Barducci Law Firm PLLC · Judge Ann Marie Donnelly · No. 1:26-cv-05478 · 42:1201 Civil Rights (Disability) · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $65K–$530K ▾
ADA accessibility outcomes split: Lowell v. Lyft (2d Cir.) affirmed dismissal for failure to prove effective modification, while Holmes v. Bax affirmed ADA violations at summary judgment; EDNY courts often let claims past MTD but require merits proof.
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, Inc. (2d Cir.) — controlling circuit precedent requiring plaintiff prove proposed accommodation's effectiveness, a high bar for small-property ADA suits.
Main risk: Dismissal or summary judgment for failure to establish standing/injury or prove effective remedy, as in Lowell v. Lyft.
Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2K–$75K
Small, ambiguous defendant with no prior litigation history and noisy web signals; figures are rough order-of-magnitude, not case-specific valuation. · grounded in 7 rulings, 3 settlements, 0 verdicts
FilingADA / AccessibilityE.D.N.Y2026-09-03$65K–$530K
comparable settlements
524 Lorimer, LLCsource ↗
filed by Barducci Law Firm PLLC · No. 1:26-cv-05479 · 42:1201 Civil Rights (Disability) · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $65K–$530K ▾
{ "outlook": "mixed", "confidence": "low", "rationale": "Comparables are largely off-point (ECOA, employment ADA, rideshare WAV), but Lowell v. Lyft shows 2d Cir. affirms dismissal when plaintiff fails to prove reasonableness, while Price v. Diab shows fee-shifting favors plaintiffs even on default. Small commercial property ADA Title III suits typically settle cheaply or get dismissed on st
Comparable settlements $65K–$530K median $200K · n=3
Covenant Retiremen $530K · Association of Apa $200K · Home Depot U.S.A., $65K
· grounded in 7 rulings, 3 settlements, 0 verdicts
FilingADA / AccessibilityE.D.N.Y2026-09-03$65K–$530K
comparable settlements
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
FilingADA / AccessibilityC.D. Cal.2026-09-03$65K–$530K
comparable settlements
Another Broken Egg of America, LLCsource ↗
No. 5:26-cv-00629 · Americans with Disabilities Act · view case timeline →
FilingADA / AccessibilityM.D. Fla.2026-09-03
Unity Immigration Office Corpsource ↗
filed by So Cal Equal Access Group · Judge Alka Sagar · No. 2:26-cv-09901 · 42:12101 Americans With Disabilities Act · view case timeline →
Comparable settlements $65K–$530K ▾
Comparable ADA rulings split: Holmes v. Bax affirmed ADA violations while Lowell v. Lyft affirmed dismissal because plaintiff failed to prove effectiveness of requested modification. Small business defendants often settle quickly but face fact-specific barrier-removal disputes.
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.) — dismissal affirmed for failure to prove reasonable/effective modification, a common defense for small physical-access claims.
Main risk: Dismissal for failure to plead a concrete, remediable architectural barrier or standing injury, as in Lowell v. Lyft
Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $4K–$75K
No prior records or direct settlement data for this defendant; estimate relies on statutory Unruh Act anchors and small-business scaling, not realized comparable payouts. · grounded in 7 rulings, 3 settlements, 0 verdicts
FilingADA / AccessibilityC.D. Cal.2026-09-03$65K–$530K
comparable settlements
Alc & Co., LLCsource ↗
filed by Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC · No. 1:26-cv-07573 · 42:12188 Americans With Disabilities Act - Civil Enforcement Actions · view case timeline →
FilingADA / AccessibilityS.D.N.Y.2026-09-03
Zoriano Associates, Incsource ↗
filed by Law Office of Jennifer E. Tucek, PC · No. 1:26-cv-05492 · 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights · view case timeline →
FilingADA / AccessibilityE.D.N.Y2026-09-03
Ali Weiss LLCsource ↗
filed by Gottlieb & Associates · No. 1:26-cv-07578 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline →
FilingADA / AccessibilityS.D.N.Y.2026-09-03
Backcountry.Com, LLCsource ↗
filed by Gottlieb & Associates · No. 1:26-cv-07579 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline →
FilingADA / AccessibilityS.D.N.Y.2026-09-03
Higgsfield Inc.source ↗
filed by Gottlieb & Associates · No. 1:26-cv-07580 · 42:12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 · view case timeline →
FilingADA / AccessibilityS.D.N.Y.2026-09-03
Innovis Data Solutions Incsource ↗
filed by Auer Legal Services, LLC · Judge Madeline Hughes Haikala · No. 2:26-cv-01587 · 28:1441 Petition for Removal · view case timeline →
FilingConsumer Credit (FCRA/FDCPA)N.D. Ala.2026-09-03
EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.source ↗
filed by LAW OFFICES OF LOUIS S SCHWARTZ · Judge Karen Spencer Marston · No. 2:26-cv-06649 · 15:1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act · view case timeline →
FilingConsumer Credit (FCRA/FDCPA)E.D. Pa.2026-09-03
Equifax Information Services, LLCsource ↗
filed by Lawson Law PLLC · Judge Corey Landon Maze · No. 1:26-cv-01589 · 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Fair Credit Reporti · view case timeline →
FilingConsumer Credit (FCRA/FDCPA)N.D. Ala.2026-09-03
Schell & Kampeter, Inc.source ↗
filed by Perrone Law LLC · No. 7:26-cv-07556 · 28:1332dtp Diversity - Deceptive Trade Practices · view case timeline →
FilingFalse AdvertisingS.D.N.Y.2026-09-03
TOTO USA, Inc.source ↗
No. 1:26-cv-07574 · 28:1332fr Diversity-Fraud · view case timeline →
FilingFalse AdvertisingS.D.N.Y.2026-09-03
Hims & Hers Health, Inc.source ↗
No. 2:26-cv-09912 · 28:1441 Notice of Removal · view case timeline →
FilingFalse AdvertisingC.D. Cal.2026-09-03
Kens Foods, LLCsource ↗
No. 1:26-cv-14074 · 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud · view case timeline →
FilingFalse AdvertisingD. Mass.2026-09-03
WVU Medicinesource ↗SettlementFees & Auto-Renewal2026-09-03
Kiasource ↗SettlementProduct Liability2026-09-03
EB5 Affiliate Network, LLCsource ↗
Judge Unassigned Judge · No. 1:26-cv-01109 · 28:1331 Fed. Question: Securities Violation · view case timeline →
FilingPrivacy & WiretapD. Del.2026-09-03
Palomar Health, Arch Health Partnerssource ↗
~$60/member · No. 37-2024-00024339-CU-NP-CTL
SettlementData Breach & SecuritySuperior Court for the State of California, County of San Diego2026-09-03$3.10M
Disney YouTube TV & DirecTV Streamsource ↗SettlementFees & Auto-Renewal2026-09-03
Fashion Novasource ↗FilingState-court filings (notable)Washington State Court2026-09-03
Flo Healthsource ↗SettlementPrivacy & Wiretap2026-09-03
Call-On-Docsource ↗
claims-made
SettlementPrivacy & Wiretap2026-09-03
Henderson & Walton Women's Centersource ↗
common fund
SettlementData Breach & Security2026-09-03
VSLsource ↗
common fund · ~$800/member · No. 8:19-cv-02173-LKG
SettlementFalse Advertising8:19-cv-02173-LKG2026-09-03$20M
Managed Care of North Americasource ↗SettlementData Breach & Security2026-09-03$2K
Sansone Groupsource ↗SettlementData Breach & Security2026-09-03$4K
North Cottage Programsource ↗
claims-made
SettlementData Breach & Security2026-09-03$700K
AOD Federal Credit Unionsource ↗
common fund
SettlementData Breach & Security2026-09-03$750K
FMC Servicessource ↗
common fund
SettlementData Breach & Security2026-09-03$2.15M
Highlands Oncology Groupsource ↗SettlementData Breach & Security2026-09-03$4K
Liberty Media / Las Vegas Grand Prix, Inc.source ↗
common fund
SettlementFees & Auto-RenewalUnited States District Court for the District of Nevada2026-09-03$3.05M
State Farmsource ↗SettlementFees & Auto-RenewalLouisiana2026-09-03
Forbessource ↗SettlementPrivacy & WiretapCalifornia2026-09-03
← NewerOlder →
Take this result set with you

Subscribers export any search as CSV or pull it through the JSON API — defendant, court, practice area, settlement value and per-member comps included.

GET /records/export.csv?sort=date&token=…  ·  GET /api/v1/records

Get Records Pro — $99/mo →