Consumer-Law Records

Price v. Diab shows ADA accessibility claims can succeed and yield injunctive relief, but fee-shifting entitlement was reversed, signaling courts scrutinize remedy scope. No Berluti-specific rulings exist, so this is a generalized ADA Title III accessibility read.

ADA Title III accessibility suits rarely yield damages absent state-law claims; Price v. Diab confirms fee-shifting for prevailing plaintiffs via injunction/default, which is the typical resolution path here.

ADA Title III web-accessibility suits like this typically survive early motions when plaintiff alleges concrete barriers, mirroring Price v. Diab's recognition of injunctive relief plus fee-shifting even on default. Small retailers rarely litigate to judgment, favoring quick settlement over prolonged discovery.

None of the comparables directly involve false-advertising claims against a consumer-products manufacturer, but Dougherty v. Bojangles shows courts often let some consumer-protection theories survive MTD while trimming others, and Cetorelli v. Duell confirms deceptive-practices claims can yield real damages awards when proven. The mismatch of comparables (data breach, arbitration, wage-hour) limits reliable inference here.

Wiretap/tracking-tech claims split in comparables: Bayhealth's confidentiality claim survived and Gunnar Optiks was revived on appeal, but Integris and LabCorp show courts scrutinizing whether a genuine consumer relationship and data-sharing occurred, which is doubtful for a B2B industrial distributor like DNOW.

Healthcare-context privacy claims show a split: Bayhealth's breach-of-confidentiality claim survived on provider-duty theory, while Integris's parallel state privacy claims remained unresolved on remand and BIPA claims required factual development rather than outright dismissal. Seasons Belleair, as a memory-care facility handling vulnerable residents' data/communications, fits the healthcare-duty framework that helped Bayhealth survive.

Comparable privacy rulings split: Doe v. Bayhealth allowed confidentiality claims to survive while Doe v. Integris left state privacy claims unclear; Clements v. Gunnar Optiks shows wiretap/tracking claims often survive dismissal on factual grounds rather than being resolved on pleadings.

Minano v. DLJ Mortgage shows courts often dismiss FCRA furnisher claims (§1681i, §1681c-2, §1681s-2(a)(8)) for lack of private right of action or insufficient pleading, while Askins v. CRST confirms bare FCRA disclosure violations can still confer standing and survive. Equifax has settled similar FCRA disputes twice in N.D. Ga. for $2.2M each, suggesting settlement remains the likely endpoint if claims survive initial motions.

False-advertising claims in analogous consumer cases show mixed outcomes: Cortez Gomez v. Kohl's saw a core pricing-deception theory sent to certification rather than resolved, while Guthrie v. Transamerica affirmed denial of class cert due to individualized reliance issues, showing courts scrutinize commonality closely.

Price v. Diab confirms ADA plaintiffs obtaining injunctive relief can be 'prevailing parties' entitled to fees, supporting survivability of well-pled accessibility claims; but the ECOA ruling is inapposite and no direct Title III merits precedent is in the sample.