Small business owners in New York are facing a wave of federal lawsuits alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, intensifying tensions between storefront operators and disability rights advocates.
Newly opened establishments and immigrant entrepreneurs are particularly affected, often incurring thousands of dollars in legal fees to resolve complaints about physical accessibility barriers.
Rodrigo Nogueira, owner of No More Cafe in Manhattan's East Village, received a summons in April 2025 listing 35 alleged violations, though the lawsuit claimed he had outdoor tables that do not exist.
Nogueira discovered through public records that the attorney who sued him had filed over 100 similar cases in the past nine years.
“Every business owner I spoke to had opened within the last year or two. Every one of them was an immigrant,” Nogueira wrote.
“None of us had any idea how to navigate the federal court system.”
He noted that several owners did not realize they had been sued until after the deadline to respond had passed.
Business advocates say settling out of court costs between $13,000 and $20,000, while fighting a case in federal court can exceed $50,000.
“The issue is around the ability for small business owners to make these changes,” said Jessica Walker, president and CEO of the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce.
Walker testified before the New York City Council about the severe financial impact on local businesses, noting that repairs can be cost-prohibitive.
Legal reform advocates argue that serial litigants use the federal system primarily to extract settlements rather than achieve meaningful accessibility improvements.
“It is the definition of throwing spaghetti against the wall and seeing what sticks,” said Tom Stebbins, executive director of the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York.
Stebbins said the current enforcement mechanism allows specialized attorneys to profit without verifying claim validity.
Disability rights organizations maintain that litigation is the primary legal mechanism to enforce compliance under the 1990 federal law.
“I get that store owners don’t like to be sued, but the vast majority of cases that are filed … there’s actual violations there,” said Michelle Uzeta, executive director of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund.
Uzeta emphasized that corporate noncompliance is handled by the Department of Justice, leaving private litigation as the main avenue for addressing smaller businesses.
“The ADA has been in place for 30-plus years at this point. There is no reason why accessibility issues have not been dealt with by now,” she said.
Legal scholars note that private enforcement was a deliberate policy design when the civil rights legislation was created.
“It was Congress’s decision to only allow enforcement through injunctive relief, primarily through private litigation,” said Ruth Colker, retired professor at Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law.
Architectural experts say executing compliance upgrades in historic or older buildings presents significant structural and regulatory challenges.
“It’s very convoluted in places and there are judgment calls,” said Ronnette Riley, a New York architect.
A bipartisan legislative proposal in the US House, the ADA 30 Days to Comply Act, seeks to establish a remediation window for small businesses.
Uzeta warned that if Congress accepts a waiting period for disability discrimination, it could invite similar logic for other protected classes.
