[blindLaw] Accessibility law firm lawsuits resources

[S]

Max, you listed two choices for the business - negotiate a settlement or 
go to court.  But you missed the most obvious choice the business has - 
make their facilities, websites, apps, etc. accessible so that people 
with disabilities have equal access.  That negates the lawsuit.  These 
laws have existed for decades.  It shouldn't have to take a lawsuit but 
how many businesses would correct their ADA violations without one?  The 
plaintiff may or may not "intend to purchase" but an inaccessible 
situation means others with a similar disability, who do intend to 
purchase, can't purchase either.  This opportunity for a lawsuit was 
created by the violator, not the law firm.

> Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2023 02:28:59 -0700
> From: Max Smith <maxs71055 at gmail.com>
> To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindLaw] Accessibility law firm lawsuits resources
>
>
> I believe this practice is unethical because the individuals they employ do not have any intention of making a purchase; instead, their sole aim is to generate profit for themselves and the law firm by threatening to file lawsuits against businesses. This forces businesses into a situation where they can either choose to pay the law firm a significantly smaller amount to make the threat go away, as opposed to the potentially higher costs they would incur if they were to be sued by the law firm.
>
>
>> On Sep 3, 2023, at 12:46 PM, Rod Alcidonis via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>
>> ?Testing to identify potential civil rights violation is not new. This is a practice regularly employed in housing discrimination investigations. As previously suggested, this is definitely a good topic for a law school paper but as a practical matter, I don't see anything unethical about this. It is one of the investigative tactics that can be used to uncover violations.
>>
>>
>> Rod,
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: BlindLaw <blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Sanho Steele-Louchart via BlindLaw
>> Sent: Sunday, September 3, 2023 2:58 PM
>> To: Blind Law Mailing List <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
>> Cc: Sanho Steele-Louchart <sanho817 at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [blindLaw] Accessibility law firm lawsuits resources
>>
>> Max,
>>
>> Is it your belief that law firms shouldn't be allowed to collect attorneys' fees in cases where they had a blind tester test a website to begin with?
>>
>> Sanho
>>
>>> On Sep 3, 2023, at 12:28 PM, Gerard Sadlier via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> ?Just for the sake of the argument, why would this be unethical,
>>> assuming the websites in question really are inaccessible, contrary to
>>> the law?
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>>
>>> Ger
>>>
>>>>> On 9/3/23, Max Smith via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>> Hello Dennis,
>>>> I am a current law student with a strong interest in web
>>>> accessibility. I am reaching out because I believe it is highly
>>>> unethical for these law firms to engage in such practices.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 1, 2023, at 10:27 AM, MIKE MCGLASHON via BlindLaw
>>>>> <blindlaw at nfbnet.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ?It sounds like a topic for a final law school paper
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Please advise as you like.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike M.
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike mcglashon
>>>>> Email: Michael.mcglashon at comcast.net
>>>>> Ph: 618 783 9331
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: BlindLaw <blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Dennis
>>>>> Clark via BlindLaw
>>>>> Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 12:18 PM
>>>>> To: Max Smith via BlindLaw <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
>>>>> Cc: Dennis Clark <dennis at dgclark.net>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindLaw] Accessibility law firm lawsuits resources
>>>>>
>>>>> Hello Max,
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you a lawyer, or a current law student? Once I know this I can
>>>>> better provide an answer that may make sense. I'm asking because
>>>>> your question as presented is somewhat unusual, and kind of reads
>>>>> like a possible law school exam question.
>>>>>
>>>>> All the best,
>>>>>
>>>>> Dennis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/1/2023 2:25 AM, Max Smith via BlindLaw wrote:
>>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm curious if anyone is aware of any instances where charges have
>>>>>> been
>>>>> brought against law firms that hire visually impaired or disabled
>>>>> individuals to identify inaccessible websites. These individuals are
>>>>> subsequently utilized to initiate lawsuits against businesses or
>>>>> companies that are considered inaccessible. The testers are
>>>>> compensated when the law firm settles the lawsuits. Essentially,
>>>>> this could be perceived as a form of extortion.
>>>>>> If anyone has a source they could point me to, I would greatly
>>>>>> appreciate
>>>>> the opportunity to delve deeper into this topic.
>>>>>