The U.S. Supreme Court vacated as moot a lawsuit that could have provided greater clarity in the handling of "tester cases" for complaints regarding the online descriptions of hotel accessibility features.
The justices decided to vacate the judgment of Acheson Hotels v. Laufer and remand it to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit with instructions to also dismiss it as moot. That was based on the plaintiff's voluntarily dismissal of her own claim during the briefings phase.
The plaintiff, Deborah Laufer, has sued "hundreds of hotels" with websites that did not provide information on accessibility features in their rooms, according to the court's opinion written by Justice Amy Coney Barrett. Some hotels settled with the plaintiff, while others, such as defendant Acheson Hotels, argued Laufer did not suffer any harm as she did not actually intend to stay at these hotels.
At issue was whether someone checking hotel websites for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act — regardless of their intent to stay at the hotels — would have standing, or the right, to sue as an ADA tester.
What Led to the Dismissal
Laufer requested the court dismiss her case after the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland suspended the license of her attorney, Tristan Gillespie, for defrauding hotels by lying in fee petitions and during settlement negotiations, according to the opinion. The attorney also directed large amounts of money to the father of Laufer's grandchild for investigatory work never completed, suggesting that "Gillespie or Laufer [or both] got a cut of the money." The sanctions order also implicated Laufer's former counsel of record, Thomas Bacon.
Acheson argued for a decision on standing. It said that while Laufer dismissed her own case and promised not to file more ADA tester suits, other testers might file suits in the district that previously ruled in her favor, leading more hotels to settle.
"We are sensitive to Acheson’s concern about litigants manipulating the jurisdiction of this court," Barrett wrote. "We are not convinced, however, that Laufer abandoned her case in an effort to evade our review. She voluntarily dismissed her pending ADA cases after a lower court sanctioned her lawyer. She represented to this court that she will not file any others. Laufer’s case against Acheson is moot, and we dismiss it on that ground."
During an HNN podcast interview in mid-October, Dana Kravetz, managing partner at law firm Michelman & Robinson, had said there was potential for this case to not deliver the satisfaction that the hotel industry had hoped for, and that a dismissal due to the plaintiff backing out was a possibility.
"If it really went went that way, then this is going to be a lot of hoopla for nothing, because they're not going to address it," he said.
Industry Reaction
After the decision came out, American Hotel & Lodging Association President and CEO Chip Rogers said in a statement that tester lawsuits seeking quick settlements from hotels have become a "cottage industry." The ADA is a critical civil rights law, but this case was not about legal compliance, but about whether "serial litigants" with no intention of staying at these hotels have standing to sue.
"While we would have welcomed a broader ruling, the Supreme Court today sent a message to other serial litigants against ‘manipulating the jurisdiction of the [Supreme Court],’ and revealed how the court ‘might exercise its discretion differently in a future case,'" he said.
"This will bring some solace to small business hoteliers who for years have been victimized by drive-by and click-by tester lawsuits,” he said.