If you just received a summons and complaint naming Gottlieb & Associates, PLLC, or attorneys Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Dana L. Gottlieb, or Michael A. LaBollita, you are not alone. This firm is one of the most active filers of website accessibility lawsuits in the country, and court records show at least 60 new cases filed by the firm in the Southern District of New York between July 9 and August 28, 2026, more than one a day.
My name is Michael Samuel. I am an ADA defense attorney in New York, admitted in 1993, and I have defended more than 100 businesses in ADA accessibility lawsuits. I see new Gottlieb & Associates complaints on the court dockets nearly every day. This article explains who filed your lawsuit, what it claims, what your deadline is, and what resolving it realistically looks like.
The most important fact first. Gottlieb & Associates files almost all of its cases in federal court, in the Southern District of New York in Manhattan. In federal court you generally have 21 days to respond after being served. The exact deadline is printed on your summons. The clock started when you were served, so do not wait to get counsel involved.
Who Is Gottlieb & Associates?
Gottlieb & Associates, PLLC is a plaintiff side law firm at 150 East 18th Street in Manhattan. Its attorneys are Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Dana L. Gottlieb, and Michael A. LaBollita. The firm’s own website describes its work as representing disabled persons under the Americans with Disabilities Act, along with consumer and wage claims, on a contingency basis, which means the firm is paid from what it recovers.
The firm files at very high volume, and the same plaintiffs appear again and again. Names such as Denise Crumwell, Victor Lopez, Sylinia Jackson, Donna Hedges, and Lawrence Young recur across dozens of cases against unrelated businesses. Filing a large number of similar lawsuits is lawful, and courts treat each case on its own merits. What it means for you, practically, is that your lawsuit is almost certainly not personal and not unusual. It follows a template, and so does the path to resolving it.
What the Court Records Show
My office tracks new federal filings every day. Between July 9 and August 28, 2026, Gottlieb & Associates filed at least 60 website accessibility cases in the Southern District of New York. Most were against online retailers and consumer brands, many of them outside New York, and most were filed as proposed class actions on behalf of “all others similarly situated.”
That number matters to you for one reason. You were not singled out. Your website was one of many found by the same method and sued on the same template. A federal judge in Manhattan made the point in 2019 when dismissing one of this firm’s website cases: “those who live by the photocopier shall die by the photocopier.” (Mendez v. Apple Inc., No. 18-cv-7550, 2019 WL 2611168, S.D.N.Y. Mar. 28, 2019.) That does not make your case go away. It tells you what kind of case it is.
What the Lawsuit Actually Claims
Gottlieb & Associates complaints typically allege that a blind or visually impaired plaintiff visited your website using screen reader software and could not fully use it. Common allegations include images without text descriptions, menus and forms that cannot be operated with a keyboard alone, and checkout or booking flows that assistive software cannot complete.
The complaint will usually assert claims under Title III of the ADA together with the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law, which allow limited damages on top of the federal claims. It will demand that your website be made accessible and will seek damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees. In practice, the attorneys’ fees are the economic engine of these cases, which is also why resolving them early usually costs far less than resolving them late.
You do not need a store in New York to be sued here. If your website sells to New York residents, the complaint will say that is enough, and these cases are routinely filed against out-of-state companies.
Is This a Real Compliance Problem, or a Volume Lawsuit?
Both things can be true at once. Your website may have accessibility gaps, because most websites do. At the same time, the litigation pattern matters to your defense. When a firm files at this volume, its cases follow a template, its settlement expectations are well established, and a defense lawyer who handles these cases regularly knows what they typically resolve for. Some of these cases are dismissed. Courts in this district have thrown out website cases where the plaintiff could not show a genuine intention to return to the site or a real injury, and where the business fixed the site before the case went anywhere. Those arguments have to be made on time and made properly.
What to Do in the First 48 Hours After Being Served
- Do not ignore it. Federal courts enter default judgments against businesses that miss their deadline, and a default is far more expensive than a defended case. The most expensive thing a business can do with one of these complaints is put it in a drawer.
- Preserve the complaint and any demand letters. Forward everything to counsel. Do not respond directly to the plaintiff’s counsel yourself. Anything you say about your website will be used.
- Start a genuine accessibility review of your website. A review does not resolve the lawsuit, but it starts building a good faith remediation record. Be careful with quick fix “accessibility overlay” widgets. Complaints in these cases have specifically named websites running such tools, so an overlay alone is not a fix and not a defense. Real remediation means changes to your site code and content, tested with actual assistive technology.
- Call a defense attorney who has handled Gottlieb & Associates cases. The right strategy differs by plaintiff firm, and this firm’s cases follow patterns an experienced defense lawyer will recognize immediately.
- Tender the claim to your insurance carrier. Some general liability and cyber policies respond to these claims or contribute to defense costs. It costs nothing to ask.
What Defending the Case Looks Like
Most of these cases in New York follow a predictable arc. The defense files an answer, the parties exchange information, and the case resolves through a negotiated settlement that includes a payment and a commitment to remediate the website within an agreed period. Defenses exist and matter. Depending on the facts, there can be real questions about the plaintiff’s standing to sue, whether the claimed barriers actually exist on your site, and whether remediation is already underway. An experienced defense lawyer evaluates all of this before any money is discussed.
A Flat Fee, So You Know the Cost Upfront
We handle ADA website accessibility defense on a flat fee basis, so you know your legal cost from the outset instead of facing an open ended hourly bill. Many of these cases resolve well before trial, often within several months, through a combination of remediation and negotiated resolution. The most expensive decision in these cases is almost always delay.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many days do I have to respond to a Gottlieb & Associates complaint?
Gottlieb & Associates files in federal court, where you generally have 21 days to respond after service. Count from the day you were served, not the day the case was filed, and confirm your exact deadline with counsel immediately, because missing it can result in a default judgment.
Is Gottlieb & Associates a legitimate law firm?
Yes. Gottlieb & Associates, PLLC is a real, active litigation firm in Manhattan, and its cases are filed in real courts with real judges. The volume of filings is a pattern worth understanding, not a reason to assume your case lacks merit or will go away on its own.
My business is not in New York. Can they sue me in New York?
If your website does business with New York residents, the complaint will assert that the court has jurisdiction, and these cases are routinely filed against out-of-state companies.
Can I just fix my website and make the lawsuit go away?
Remediation is an important part of a defense strategy, but voluntary fixes alone do not automatically end a filed lawsuit. Courts in New York have allowed cases to continue past early motions even where the business claimed its website had been fixed, because the plaintiff is entitled to test that claim. How and when you remediate, and how it is documented, should be coordinated with your defense lawyer.
What does it cost to defend a Gottlieb & Associates lawsuit?
We offer flat fee pricing for ADA website accessibility defense, so you know your cost upfront rather than facing an open ended hourly bill. A case that is answered on time and negotiated early is usually resolved for a fraction of what the same case costs after a default or months of unfocused litigation.
Will the same plaintiff sue me again?
Not if the site is fixed and the settlement is drafted properly. That is part of what the defense is for.
If You Have Been Served, Do This Today
Bring your summons and complaint to a defense lawyer who handles these specific cases, before your response deadline, not after. I review new ADA filings in the New York courts every day, I know the firms that file them, and I will tell you plainly what your case is and what it should take to end it.
Call me directly at 212-563-9884, learn more about our ADA defense practice in New York, or read my Step by Step Guide for Website Owners Targeted with ADA Accessibility Lawsuits. If you were sued by a different firm, see my articles on Mizrahi Kroub lawsuits and Shaked Law Group lawsuits.
Michael Samuel has practiced law in New York for more than 30 years and has defended more than 100 businesses in ADA accessibility lawsuits. He was admitted to the New York bar in 1993 (Registration No. 2563005) and is admitted before the United States District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York.
Attorney Advertising. This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney client relationship. Every case is different. Consult a lawyer about your specific situation. Factual statements about filing volume are based on public court records and published reporting.
