Over the past several years, I’ve spent much of my time working alongside defense counsel and internal teams navigating ADA website litigation. Those conversations often surface practical insights about how claims are evolving and what legal teams see once a case is underway.
This post is part of an ongoing series I’m calling “Notes from the Field.” The goal is simple: to share patterns emerging from real discussions with attorneys handling these cases today. Not theory, not speculation, but observations drawn from active matters and client conversations.
In a recent conversation with defense counsel handling active ADA website matters, I asked a simple question:
After a client receives a demand letter or lawsuit, what actually changes?
The answers were consistent across conversations and focused on execution.
Two Immediate Objectives
Defense counsel focus on two core objectives once a claim is filed:
- Resolve the current matter efficiently and cost-effectively
- Reduce the risk of copycat claims and repeat filings
Those goals drive the strategy that follows. The first is about case resolution. The second is about reducing future exposure.
Testing as Triage and Defense
Defense counsel explained that their approach typically includes both automated testing and manual review.
In 2026, lawyers are using tools like PowerMapper, Lighthouse, and WAVE alongside targeted manual testing. The purpose isn't just to evaluate specific allegations in the complaint. Counsel wants a clear view of overall exposure and a remediation plan they can defend
Plaintiffs’ firms no longer rely on automated scans. As automated scores improve, complaints lean more on manual testing and documented user experiences. Those findings surface barriers that automated tools miss.
One attorney described this as "the natural evolution of these cases." The bar keeps moving.
Resource Constraints Slow Remediation
A recurring theme: many clients lack the internal resources to address accessibility issues quickly or comprehensively.
Common scenarios include:
- The original development agency can't efficiently remediate
- The site was built on a platform like Shopify, but the company has no in-house technical expertise
- Large organizations have internal IT teams focused on revenue-generating initiatives with limited bandwidth for accessibility updates
What Counsel Prioritize When Advising Clients
- Practical, layered testing
- Honest resource assessment
- Cost-effective resolution strategies
- Signaling credibility and seriousness
- Reducing repeat exposure through positioning, not just remediation
Even when leadership wants to fix issues, remediation stalls.
Defense counsel are often managing not just legal strategy, but also the logistics of who can actually do the work and how quickly it can get done.
"Reducing the Temperature"
One phrase that stood out: the goal of "reducing the temperature" around these cases.
Beyond technical remediation, defense counsel sometimes focus on handling matters in a way that signals seriousness and discourages future targeting without pushing the case into expensive litigation.
This can include filing strategies or positioning that suggests the matter was contested rather than quietly resolved. The objective is to avoid becoming an easy repeat target.
As one attorney put it: "We want to make it harder for them to come back."
Repeat Exposure Is the Reality
When discussing filing trends, repeat defendants came up immediately.
Our tracking shows that a significant percentage of companies that were sued for digital accessibility violations had prior filings in recent years.
Defense counsel weren't surprised by that data.
Their focus stays grounded. They are not trying to eliminate risk entirely, especially without a clear regulatory standard. They focus on practical tools and tactics to stop cases early or limit escalation.
A Consistent Theme: Realism Over Perfection
What stood out most was how practical these conversations were.
No one suggested that a website can be bulletproof. In fact, the lack of a clear regulatory standard was cited as one reason these cases persist.
Instead, the focus is on:
These are incremental strategies. They reflect how cases move and how plaintiffs operate.
Final Thought
Digital accessibility litigation remains a space where law and technology intersect in very practical, sometimes messy ways. Conversations like this reinforce how defense counsel are navigating these case by case.
If you found this insightful, please check out my other post in "Notes from the Field," series.
I always appreciate comparing notes with firms handling these matters. If you're seeing different trends or tactics in your cases, I'd like to hear about them.
.jpg)
