Got Sued by Gottlieb & Associates for ADA Violations? Read This First.

You opened your mail. Or maybe it was a process server. Either way, there it is: a demand letter or federal complaint from Gottlieb & Associates, a New York-based law firm, alleging your website violates the Americans with Disabilities Act or violated the Electronics Communication Privacy Act for running Facebook’s Meta-Pixel.

Your stomach dropped. We get it. But before you do anything including calling the first lawyer you find on Google or ChatGPT — you need to understand exactly what you’re dealing with, what it will realistically cost you, and why the lawsuit you just received may actually be the least of your website’s legal problems.

Who Is Gottlieb & Associates?

Gottlieb & Associates PLLC is a New York-based boutique litigation firm that focuses almost exclusively on plaintiff-side disability rights and consumer protection cases. The firm’s principal attorneys are Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Dana L. Gottlieb, and Michael A. LaBollita.

The firm describes itself as dedicated to representing disabled persons whose rights have been violated under the Americans with Disabilities Act. It operates on a contingency fee basis, meaning attorneys collect fees only when they win — which creates a strong structural incentive to file high volumes of cases.

In the ADA website litigation space, Gottlieb & Associates is among the most prolific filers in the United States. Industry data shows the firm filed the highest number of ADA website lawsuits in November 2024 — 54 in a single month, representing nearly 20% of all such cases filed nationally that month. In the first half of 2025, the firm filed over 200 lawsuits, placing it among the top two most active firms in the country alongside Manning Law, APC.

The firm’s targets are broad. If your business has a public-facing website — and especially if you’re in retail, fashion, food and beverage, healthcare, or beauty — you are in their crosshairs. Common plaintiffs the firm represents include individuals like Denise Crumwell, Victor Lopez, Lawrence Young, Henry Tucker, and Donna Hedges, who file on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated.

How Their ADA Lawsuit Machine Works

Understanding Gottlieb & Associates’ methodology is the first step to responding strategically. Their operation follows a well-worn template:

Step 1: Automated Site Scanning

Plaintiff law firms in this space use automated tools to scan thousands of websites simultaneously, flagging technical accessibility failures. Common violations they target include:

• Missing or inadequate alternative text (alt-text) on images
• Poor color contrast ratios that screen readers cannot navigate
• Forms without proper labels
• Missing CAPTCHA alternatives
• PDFs that are not screen-reader compatible
• Videos without closed captions
• Navigation that cannot be operated by keyboard alone

Step 2: Boilerplate Complaints Filed En Masse

Once a violation is flagged, the firm files a near-identical complaint in federal court — typically in the Southern District of New York — on behalf of a visually impaired “tester” plaintiff. The complaints allege the site’s inaccessibility violates Title III of the ADA, as well as the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL) and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL) where applicable.

Step 3: Settlement Demand

The firm sends or serves a demand that typically includes: a monetary payment, a requirement that you make your website accessible, often an independent audit, and attorney’s fees. Because fighting these cases costs more than settling, most businesses pay.

What You’re Actually Facing: Costs & Timeline

Let’s be direct. Here’s a realistic picture of what an ADA website lawsuit from Gottlieb & Associates will cost you:

Settlement amounts for small businesses typically land between $5,000 and $20,000, with those resolving before a complaint is filed often settling for less. Size matters: firms are often willing to reduce demands when defendants can document limited revenue. But the settlement is only part of the cost — attorney fees, website repairs, mandatory audits, and ongoing monitoring can easily double or triple your total exposure. If you don’t fix your website expect to have 5-10 ADA lawsuits a year.

Immediate Steps If You’ve Been Served

What Not to Do

Businesses facing ADA lawsuits for the first time make predictable — and costly — mistakes. Avoid these:

• Don’t install an accessibility overlay and call it done. Tools like accessiBe, UserWay, and AudioEye modify how your site appears to some assistive technology users, but they don’t fix underlying source code. Courts are increasingly rejecting these as adequate compliance — the FTC settled with accessiBe in April 2025 for deceptive marketing claims about WCAG compliance. Gottlieb & Associates continues to sue sites that use these widgets.
• Don’t try to ignore the lawsuit to see if it goes away. It won’t. Default judgments are final, enforceable, and damaging to your credit and business records.
• Don’t hire a generalist attorney to handle this. ADA Title III digital accessibility cases require specialized knowledge of WCAG technical standards and federal civil procedure. A lawyer without ADA defense experience can dramatically increase your costs.
• Don’t admit knowledge of the accessibility barriers in writing or verbally. This can affect damages calculations in negotiations.
• Don’t assume that fixing your site ends your risk. Nearly half of businesses sued in 2024 had already been sued before. Once Gottlieb & Associates or any serial filer identifies your site as non-compliant, it enters a pool of known targets.

Why Your Website’s Privacy Violations Are a Far Bigger Threat

Here’s what most businesses miss when they’re staring down a Gottlieb & Associates lawsuit: the ADA claim is often the smallest legal risk your website carries.

While you’re worried about a $10,000–$20,000 ADA settlement, your website is almost certainly engaging in data collection practices that expose you to class-action lawsuits with per-user statutory damages, state attorney general enforcement, and FTC investigations. Recent cases have been up to $5 million for violations. 

This isn’t hypothetical. A new wave of litigation is accelerating across the country under laws with far sharper teeth than the ADA’s Title III:

California’s Privacy Laws: CCPA, CPRA, and CIPA

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) and its amendment, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), impose statutory penalties of up to $7,988 per intentional violation — and that number is applied per consumer. A single class action representing tens of thousands of California visitors to your website can result in liability in the tens of millions of dollars. Just ask Healthline or Honda how they feel about paying out big fines to California?

Even more aggressive is the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), which courts have increasingly applied to websites that use third-party tracking pixels, session recording tools, and embedded analytics. CIPA’s statutory damages reach the greater of $5,000 or triple actual damages — per violation. A recent court ruling affirmed CIPA’s private right of action, and courts have ruled that CCPA claims do not preempt CIPA claims, meaning plaintiffs can pursue both simultaneously.

The Rise of “Trap and Trace” Lawsuits

A new category of privacy class actions is emerging under California Penal Code Sections 638.51 and 637.2 — so-called “trap and trace” lawsuits. These allege that websites collecting user data without proper authorization are intercepting private communications. Industry reports flagged this trend explicitly in the 2024 ADA Annual Report as a significant escalation in litigation risk for website owners and firms like Swigart Law & Vivek Shah are going crazy filing lawsuits.

State Privacy Laws Expanding Nationwide

As of 2026, over 20 U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy legislation. Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, Texas, Oregon, Montana, Florida, and others now have enforceable consumer privacy rights with real penalties. Your website may be out of compliance in multiple states simultaneously, each with its own penalty structure.

ADA vs. Privacy Violations: A Direct Cost Comparison

Real Enforcement Actions You Should Know About

• American Honda Motor Co. — Fined $632,500 by the California Privacy Protection Agency for failing to honor opt-out preference signals and imposing excessive verification hurdles on consumer requests.
• Sephora — $1.2 million CCPA settlement with California AG, plus injunctive requirements to honor opt-outs and Global Privacy Control signals.
• BetterHelp — FTC enforcement action over sharing users’ health information with advertising partners via tracking software. The court found that allowing tracking software amounted to an unauthorized disclosure.
• Harvard University — Paid $1.575 million in attorney costs and fees in an ADA case involving inaccessible online course content. The underlying remediation cost millions more.

How to Fix Both Problems — and Build Real Legal Protection

The good news: solving your ADA compliance and your privacy compliance involves much of the same underlying work — a thorough audit of your website, identification of what data is collected and shared, implementation of proper consent mechanisms, and ongoing monitoring.

Businesses that address both simultaneously are in the strongest legal position: they can demonstrate good-faith compliance to ADA plaintiffs while reducing the surface area for privacy class actions.

For ADA Compliance:

• Commission a full WCAG 2.1 AA audit by a certified accessibility specialist — not an automated scan alone
• Implement substantive code-level fixes (not just an overlay widget)
• Publish an accessibility statement with a feedback mechanism
• Establish ongoing monitoring and annual re-audits
• Train content editors to maintain accessibility as they add new content

For Privacy Compliance:

• Map all data collected from website visitors — including data shared with third parties through pixels, analytics, and ad tools
• Implement a compliant consent management platform (CMP) that properly gates data collection
• Honor Global Privacy Control (GPC) signals, which California law now requires
• Update your privacy policy with specific, accurate disclosures — not vague boilerplate
• Establish data subject request (DSR) workflows for consumer access, deletion, and opt-out rights
• Review and update contracts with any third-party vendors who receive user data