Sued by Roderick V. Hannah and Pelayo Duran over your website?

Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. (Sunrise) and the Law Office of Pelayo Duran, P.A. (Virginia Gardens) are two South Florida law firms that file ADA website lawsuits together in Florida's federal courts, in Orlando and Miami. If your business was named in one, here's what the complaints say and what to do first.

This is a technical accessibility assessment, not legal advice, and automated testing cannot establish ADA compliance.

What the court records show

Between August 7 and October 22, 2026, the Law Office of Pelayo Duran appears as plaintiff's counsel in 20 ADA cases, by our count of the public dockets on CourtListener: 12 in the Middle District of Florida's Orlando division and 8 in the Southern District of Florida, for five plaintiffs. Most name a national or regional chain: restaurant groups, clothing and beauty retailers, a furniture store, a theme park. A few name a single local business. Only 2 of the complaints are public so far, and we read both: a restaurant chain and a theme park. Both were about a website, and both list Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. as counsel and the Law Office of Pelayo Duran as co-counsel.

What the complaint says

The 2 complaints follow the same template and run 27 and 32 pages:

• The plaintiff is visually impaired, lives in central Florida and uses a screen reader. The complaint says he also visits websites as a "tester," to check whether they are accessible, and will keep checking the site after the case is filed.
• He visited the website once or twice, one to three months before the case was filed, to look at the menu or tickets and plan a purchase at the business's Orlando-area location.
• The complaint lists 8 or 9 barriers. One complaint describes them in plain words; the other gives the WCAG 2.1 rule for each and says the plaintiff's expert confirmed them. They are specific to each site: images and buttons announced only as "image" or "button," a logo link that doesn't say where it goes, menus the keyboard can't open or can't leave, a reservation that is never confirmed out loud, a pickup button and a cart price a screen reader can't reach.
• An accessibility statement didn't help. One site had one, linked at the bottom of the home page; the complaint says it was itself hard to reach and offered no real help. The other site had none.
• An expert hired by the plaintiff visited the site afterwards and found the same barriers and more.
• A notice may or may not come first. Both complaints say notice before suing isn't required. One says a written pre-suit notice went to the business about two months before the case was filed and attaches it; the other mentions no notice.

Each one makes one claim, under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

What it asks the court for

• A declaration that the website violates the ADA.
• An order to fix the website by a set date and keep monitoring it, including any third-party vendors on it.
• A disability logo on the website linking to an accessibility page, an accessibility policy linked from the home page, a way to send accessibility feedback, and a website accessibility coordinator.
• Yearly accessibility training for whoever writes code for or publishes to the website.
• Automated accessibility tests every three months, with 12 quarterly reports sent to the plaintiff's lawyers.
• The plaintiff's attorneys' fees, costs and expenses.

What any of this means for your business is a question for your attorney. How these lawsuits work, in plain English.

Common questions

Is the lawsuit real?

A filed case has a case number, such as 6:26-cv-01873. You can look it up free on CourtListener or on PACER, the federal courts' own system. If the case is there, it's real.

We got a notice letter from this firm. Should we wait?

In the complaint that mentions one, the lawsuit followed the notice about two months later, and it says the barriers were still there. Talk to an attorney about the notice, and start checking the barriers it names now.

We're not a big chain. Why us?

Most of these cases name chains, but not all: a few name one local business. The complaints argue that the website serves a place open to the public, whatever the size of the business. Whether that holds is a legal question; ask your attorney.

We have an accessibility statement. Doesn't that cover us?

One of the two sites had one, and the complaint counts it as part of the problem because it was hard to reach and didn't help. A statement doesn't change the code underneath, which is where these barriers are. Do accessibility widgets stop lawsuits?

Will an automated scan find these problems?

Only some of them. A scan finds images and buttons with no text and a logo link with no name. Most of the other barriers in these complaints, like a menu the keyboard can't leave or a confirmation that isn't announced, show up only when someone works through the site with a keyboard and a screen reader. How we test, and what a scan can't tell you.

First steps

1. Write down the date you were served and talk to an attorney. A lawsuit has a short, fixed deadline to respond. Ignoring it doesn't make it go away.
2. List the specific barriers in the complaint. Each one names the part of the page, so you can check it on your own site.
3. Test your menus, booking and checkout with a keyboard. Navigation menus, reservations, pickup options and the cart come up in these complaints.
4. Get the technical facts. Find out which barriers still exist today, and what else a scan finds. The complaint says its list is not the full list.
5. Fix the real issues in the site itself. Step-by-step fixes: WordPress, Shopify.
6. Keep dated records of what was wrong, what you changed and when.

How we counted

On October 27, 2026 we searched CourtListener for federal civil-rights cases coded "ADA – Other" that list the Law Office of Pelayo Duran as plaintiff's counsel and were filed from July 1 to October 27, 2026. CourtListener doesn't list Roderick V. Hannah, Esq., P.A. on these dockets, so we couldn't count that firm's cases separately. Cases that haven't reached CourtListener aren't counted, so the real number may be higher. We read the complaints that were available as public documents. We have no connection to either firm or their clients. If anything here is wrong, tell us and we'll correct it.

Sued by a different firm? See Gottlieb & Associates, Joseph & Norinsberg, Usher Law Group, East End Trial Group, Nye, Stirling, Hale, Miller & Sweet, ADA Legal Team, Mendez Law Offices.