ADA Compliance For Restaurants and Hospitality

In 2025, plaintiffs filed 3,948 ADA website accessibility lawsuits . That's down slightly from previous years, but the concentration is what matters. The food and beverage and restaurant sectors were the biggest target, facing over 1,300 lawsuits . That's one out of every three cases.

The first half of 2025 alone saw 2,014 lawsuits filed, a 37% increase year over year . Restaurants, food and beverage, and hospitality accounted for 30.5% of those—614 cases in six months .

The hospitality industry isn't far behind. Hotels, resorts, and lodging properties have been sued repeatedly over websites and booking engines that don't work with screen readers . In 2023, a Maryland lawyer representing just two clients filed over 1,000 nearly identical lawsuits against hotels . The lawyer got sanctioned and recommended for suspension, but the lawsuits still happened.

Missouri saw over 200 website accessibility lawsuits filed recently, ranking 7th nationwide . Minnesota had similar numbers. These aren't coastal states with aggressive plaintiffs' bars. This is everywhere.

Why restaurants and hotels are targeted

The ADA covers "public accommodations" in Title III. Restaurants and hotels are explicitly listed in the statute . That's never been in dispute.

What's changed is the interpretation of what counts as a public accommodation. Courts have increasingly held that if you have a physical location and a website that allows customers to interact with that location—ordering food, booking rooms, checking menus—that website is covered by the ADA .

The logic is straightforward. If a blind person can't book a room because your website doesn't work with screen readers, they've been denied access to your hotel. If someone with a motor disability can't order takeout because your menu isn't keyboard-navigable, they've been denied service.

The Ninth Circuit ruled on this in 2019 in the Domino's case. The Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal . That left standing the principle that websites connected to physical businesses must be accessible.

There is some circuit split. In April 2021, the 11th Circuit ruled in the Winn-Dixie case that websites are not places of public accommodation under the plain language of Title III . But that's the minority position, and the case involved a site that didn't sell products directly—just prescription refills and coupons. Most courts outside the 11th Circuit have rejected that reasoning.

The physical side still matters

Digital accessibility is the growth area for lawsuits, but physical compliance hasn't gone away.

Restaurant owners have a duty to ensure their premises are compliant . The ADA Standards for Accessible Design specify measurements, slopes, clearances, and ratios .

Parking is a common problem. Designated accessible spaces need to be wide enough, clearly signed, and close to an accessible entrance. Putting the accessible space at the bottom of stairs when the ramp is on the other side of the building doesn't work .

Restroom access is another. Someone needs to be able to reach the toilet paper and the sink. The rules are specific about clear floor space, grab bar placement, and fixture heights .

Dining surfaces matter. Some customers need lower tables or chairs. Some need more space around their table. The ADA requires a certain number of accessible seating locations based on total capacity .

Service animals create confusion. Restaurant owners who don't like dogs sometimes try to exclude them. The law requires service animals to be allowed . That's not discretionary.

For rooftop restaurants and specialized spaces, additional considerations apply. Pathways must maintain slopes no greater than 1:20 and surfaces must be firm, stable, and slip-resistant . Tables need minimum knee clearance of 27 inches and height between 28 to 34 inches for wheelchair users .

The digital problem: menus, reservations, and orders

The digital side is where most restaurant owners get blindsided.

Kevin Nashan runs Sidney Street Cafe and Peacemaker Lobster & Crab in St. Louis. He's a James Beard Award-winning chef. He got a lawyer's letter saying his websites weren't compatible with screen reader software .

Nashan thought the lawsuit was meaningless and荒唐. He settled anyway. Settlement costs in these cases typically run $5,000 to $15,000, plus your own legal fees .

Dave Bailey had a similar experience. He said if he'd known about the problem, he would have fixed it immediately. But the lawyer's letter didn't give him a chance to fix anything. It just demanded money .

The lawyer who sued Nashan and dozens of other St. Louis businesses represented the same blind plaintiff in over 70 lawsuits against restaurants, pharmacies, grocery stores, and even an emergency room .

The plaintiff's bar has industrialized this

The numbers are worth sitting with.

Forty law firms filed all 3,948 website accessibility lawsuits in 2025. Thirty-three plaintiffs initiated over half of those cases .

Equal Access Law Group filed 641 cases. Manning Law filed 615 . Stein Saks, Mizrahi Kroub, Gottlieb & Associates—these are law firms that have filed thousands of nearly identical lawsuits.

The complaints are copy-pasted. The plaintiffs are repeat players. One plaintiff, Nelson Fernandez, has sued 312 businesses since 2022 .

The business model works like this: Automated tools scan thousands of websites for detectable WCAG violations—missing alt text, empty links, missing form labels. The tool generates a report. The law firm files a complaint. The plaintiff never actually visited the site until after the scan identified it as a target.

Small businesses are disproportionately targeted. In 2023, 73 percent of website accessibility lawsuits targeted businesses with annual revenue under $25 million .

The reason is simple. Small businesses can't afford to fight. Settlement costs are set just below the cost of mounting a defense. It's cheaper to pay $5,000 to $20,000 than to spend $50,000 on lawyers.

The overlay problem

Accessibility widgets and overlays have become a huge industry. Companies sell JavaScript tools that claim to make any site accessible with one line of code.

They don't work.

In the first half of 2025, 456 lawsuits—22.6%—targeted websites that used accessibility widgets or plug-ins as quick fixes instead of addressing core compliance issues .

In 2025, the FTC reached a $1 million settlement with accessiBe, finding the company misled businesses by marketing its widget as a guaranteed compliance tool .

The Overlay Fact Sheet, signed by more than 700 accessibility professionals including experts from Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Shopify, states plainly that overlays don't fix underlying code problems.

If your site has missing heading structure, improper form labels, or keyboard traps, an overlay can't fix those. It just adds a layer on top. Plaintiffs' lawyers know how to test whether overlays actually work. They file suit when they don't.

What WCAG requires

The technical standard is WCAG 2.1 Level AA. The Department of Justice adopted this as the required standard for state and local governments in April 2024 . For private businesses, it's the de facto standard courts use.

For restaurants and hotels, the specific requirements include:

Images need alt text so screen reader users know what's shown . Menu items, photos of dining rooms, pictures of hotel rooms—all of it needs descriptive text. Every image on your site should have descriptive alt text .

Color contrast needs to be sufficient for users with low vision. Light gray text on a white background is a common failure. All text must have a color contrast ratio of 4.5:1 against its background .

Keyboard navigation must work . Users who can't use a mouse need to tab through menus, buttons, and forms. If they can't reach the "Order Now" button, they can't order. All functions and content must be accessible by keyboard only .

Forms need proper labels and error identification . When a user makes a mistake on a reservation form, they need to know what went wrong and how to fix it. Forms must have coded labels for fields, clear instructions, and clear error indications .

Video content needs captions for deaf users . That includes promotional videos, cooking demonstrations, and virtual tours. All video with meaningful sound must contain accurate, synced closed captioning .

Booking engines need to work with assistive technology. Hotel reservation systems are a particular focus because they're essential to conducting business .

The most common accessibility barriers cited in lawsuits include missing or incorrect image alt text, inaccessible forms and checkout processes, keyboard navigation failures, poor color contrast, and improper heading structures .

The geographic expansion

New York remains the most litigious state with 637 lawsuits in the first half of 2025, accounting for 31.6% of filings .

Florida nearly doubled filings, climbing to 487 cases (24.2%) .

California rose to 380 cases (18.9%), led by Los Angeles County .

Illinois emerged as a new hub, skyrocketing 746% year over year from just 28 cases in 2024 to 237 in 2025 .

If you have customers in these states, you can be sued there. You don't need a physical location.

The business case nobody talks about

The compliance consultants all mention the market size. Around one in five Americans have some form of disability . Travelers with disabilities spend billions per year on travel . One billion people worldwide experience disability.

Those numbers are real. If your site isn't accessible, you're turning away a massive customer segment.

But there's another business case that's less pleasant. The cost of fixing accessibility proactively is lower than the cost of settling one lawsuit.

Seattle Public Schools budgeted $665,000 to $815,000 for remediation after getting sued. That's a school district. For a restaurant, one lawsuit with a quick settlement runs $5,000 to $20,000 plus legal fees. If you get sued twice because your fixes weren't complete, that doubles.

Forty-six percent of federal cases involve repeat defendants. Plaintiffs track litigation history. They know which companies settled without truly fixing their sites.

What the DOJ actually says

The ADA.gov website is clear about requirements for businesses .

You must communicate with people with disabilities as effectively as you communicate with others. You must make reasonable modifications to policies where needed. You must allow service animals. You must remove architectural barriers when readily achievable .

The "readily achievable" standard is based on your size and resources. A chain with 50 locations is expected to do more than a single diner. The ADA strikes a careful balance between increasing access and understanding the financial challenges of small businesses .

For websites, the DOJ's position is that the ADA applies even without specific regulations. The April 2024 rule adopting WCAG 2.1 for governments signals what the DOJ considers appropriate. Private businesses should expect similar scrutiny.

The Kansas solution

Some states are trying to address the lawsuit abuse.

Kansas passed the Anti-Abusive Website Litigation Act in 2023 . It gives businesses 30 days after receiving written notice to fix accessibility problems. If they fix them, they can't be sued. They can also counter-sue if the lawsuit was abusive.

A similar federal bill was proposed in 2024 but didn't pass .

The idea is to separate genuine accessibility advocacy from litigation-for-profit. If the goal is actually to make websites accessible, a notice-and-cure period makes sense. If the goal is to extract settlements, the lack of notice is strategic.

Most restaurant owners say they'd fix problems if they knew about them. Dave Bailey's experience—getting sued without any chance to fix things first—is common .

What you actually need to do

Start with an audit. Run automated tools to catch obvious issues—missing alt text, low contrast, missing form labels. But don't stop there. Automated tools catch maybe 30 percent of problems. Use both automated and manual testing .

Hire someone who knows what they're doing. Accessibility consultants who actually test with screen readers and keyboard-only navigation will find what automated tools miss. The W3C has a list of web accessibility evaluation tools .

Fix the high-impact issues first. Online menus, reservation forms, order buttons—these are the functions customers need most. If those don't work, nothing else matters .

For images, enter descriptive alt text. Every meaningful image needs it . For room type images in hotel booking engines, this is critical .

For forms, ensure they have coded labels, clear instructions, and clear error indications .

For video, add captions and transcripts .

For keyboard users, test that everything works with Tab, Enter, and arrow keys . A focus indicator should show on all links and fields .

Train your staff. If you have developers, they need to know how to code accessibly. If you have content people, they need to know how to write alt text and structure headings. Staff should be trained to assist patrons respectfully and understand accessibility features .

Document everything. Keep records of audits, fixes, and testing. If you do get sued, that documentation shows good faith . It also helps with the "undue burden" defense if you're arguing that some fixes aren't readily achievable.

If you use third-party vendors for your website or booking engine, make sure your contract requires WCAG 2.1 AA compliance. The DOJ rule explicitly covers content provided through contractors. You're still responsible.

For physical locations, check your parking, pathways, restrooms, and dining surfaces . Make sure service animals are welcome .

Post an accessibility statement on your website explaining your commitment and providing a way for users to report problems .

The trade-offs

Compliance costs money. An audit might run $5,000 to $25,000 depending on site complexity. Development fixes cost more. Ongoing maintenance requires staff time.

The trade-off is that non-compliance costs money too. Settlement payments, legal fees, remediation costs, and the risk of repeat lawsuits add up.

There's also a trade-off with overlays. They're cheap and easy. They make you feel like you've done something. But the data shows they don't prevent lawsuits—and may increase risk. Nearly 25% of lawsuits in 2025 targeted websites using widgets .

The better trade is to build accessibility into your development process from the start. It's cheaper to do it right once than to retrofit later.

The bottom line

Restaurants and hotels get sued under the ADA more than any other industry. Over 1,300 website cases in 2025. A 37% increase in filings. Serial plaintiffs filing hundreds of identical complaints.

The law is clear enough. The ADA covers your physical space and your digital presence . WCAG 2.1 AA is the standard courts use . The DOJ has been enforcing this for decades.

The system has problems. Some lawsuits are abusive. Some lawyers are in it for fees, not access. Missouri small business owners describe these suits as "legal extortion" and "shakedowns" .

But the underlying obligation is real. Your website needs to work for people with disabilities. Your restaurant needs to be physically accessible. Your staff needs to accommodate service animals.

The restaurants that treat compliance as a one-time fix get sued again. The ones that build accessibility into their operations—regular testing, ongoing maintenance, staff training—reduce their risk.

Start with an audit. Fix what's broken. Document what you did. And if you get a lawyer's letter, don't panic. Call a lawyer who actually defends these cases, not someone who just sends demand letters.

The money you spend on compliance is less than the money you'll spend on one lawsuit. And your customers—all of them—will actually be able to use your site.