The ADA Lawsuit Machine: How Mizrahi Kroub, Kevin Puckett & Gregory Sconzo Profit from Small Business Litigation
The Rise of Mass ADA Lawsuits
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), a cornerstone law designed to ensure equal access for individuals with disabilities, has become a goldmine for opportunistic lawyers. Among the worst offenders are Mizrahi Kroub LLP (formerly Izmirlyan Kroub), Kevin W. Puckett, and Gregory S. Sconzo, who have turned ADA lawsuits into a volume-based legal practice that disproportionately impacts small businesses.
These firms pursue a high volume of ADA lawsuits, often leading small businesses to settle rather than engage in prolonged legal battles. Despite claiming to champion accessibility, their tactics rarely result in meaningful improvements – I have spoken to several small businesses who simply paid the settlement and did not make sweeping changers to their sites – raising concerns that their tactics prioritize financial settlements over true accessibility improvements..
The number of annual ADA cases that are formally filed has grown 5x in the past 5 years – and now over 100,000 of these cases are filed each year (1,100 of these lawsuits were filed by Mizrahi alone showing how systematized their approach appears to be).
Mizrahi Kroub: Serial Litigators
Mizrahi Kroub, once known as Izmirlyan Kroub, has led the charge in weaponizing ADA lawsuits. The Wall Street Journal reports that the firm filed over 1,100 website accessibility lawsuits in a single year, using the same boilerplate complaints and a handful of repeat plaintiffs. These lawsuits target small businesses ill-equipped to fight, forcing settlements that often do nothing to improve accessibility.
"They just copy and paste these lawsuits," said one business owner. "They don’t care about accessibility; they care about their bank accounts."
Kevin W. Puckett and Gregory S. Sconzo: The Next Wave of Aggressive Litigators
March 1st, 2025 edit: I received a legal letter of demand dated February 21, 2025 from Kevin Puckett and Gregory Sconzo who assert that this article “constitutes a violation of federal anti-retaliation law” and they will, “in addition to pursuing claims for defamation, tortious interference, and any other available state-law remedies, [they] reserve the right to assert federal retaliation claims under 42 U.S.C. § 12203 if [I] persist in these efforts and with the ongoing publication of this Article.”
I have fact checked key details and but for one correction where I previously stated that Kevin W. Puckett and Gregory S. Sconzo send “dozens of demand letters a week” I have now corrected the article after their feedback indicating that they have filed “fewer than 60 website accessibility cases since inception” though I suspect they have sent many multiples that in demand letters or initial warnings to companies to yield the 60 cases they formally filed.
I will state here, formally, that I will not be intimidated by their threats for legal action and feel it important to make a stand against entities causing what appears to be substantial undue legal and financial harm to the start up and small business community.
Building on the model pioneered by Mizrahi Kroub, Kevin W. Puckett and Gregory S. Sconzo have joined the fray with their own model of ADA enforcement. Known for sending dozens of demand letters,their firm aggressively pursues small businesses with legal threats over alleged Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) violations. In a legal demand letter sent by their Kansas City based ADA Legal Team, they informed me they have “filed…60 ADA website accessibility cases since its inception”. I suspect – though I cannot prove – that to file ~60 cases formally, many hundreds of initial demand letters were sent to small businesses.
The hypocrisy? Despite demanding strict adherence to WCAG standards, the website of Gregory Sconzo, as an example, appears to have accessibility issues, according to automated scans, though manual testing may provide additional insight. Automated scans reveal missing alt-text, poor color contrast, and inaccessible forms.
"It’s infuriating," said one founder. "Despite their strict enforcement of WCAG, their own websites have flagged accessibility issues in automated scans. It seems like it’s not about justice; it’s about money."
March 5th edit: Despite multiple opportunities to clarify case outcomes, attorneys Kevin Puckett and Gregory Sconzo declined to disclose how many cases settled versus how many proceeded to trial. However, they confirmed that none of their cases have been dismissed outright. Their refusal to provide transparency leaves open the question of how many cases truly lead to accessibility improvements versus settlements.
an audit of the website of Gregory S. Sconzo ; source: ADA Compliance Pros
Victims Speak Out: The High Cost of Fighting ADA Litigation
For small business owners, facing a demand letter from Kevin W. Puckett and Gregory S. Sconzo feels like stepping into a trap. Here are a few stories:
One Business Owner:
"We settled with Mizrahi Kroub for $5,000 because fighting wasn’t worth it. Now Puckett and Sconzo are after us for the same website. It’s clear they’re not helping anyone but themselves."The Team Member:
"We’re constantly trying to improve our site’s accessibility – from alt tags to the size and locations of buttons – but they don’t seem interested in fixes. They appear to want settlements. It’s demoralizing to be targeted for something we’re actively working on."Another Business Owner:
"Their letter demanded a large settlement. Fighting it would’ve cost us more than we could afford so we paid $5,000 to settle. It’s crushing for a small business like ours. These lawyers are taking advantage of the system, not protecting it."
rapid growth in specious litigation for ADA cases; source: AccessiBe
ADA Lawsuits: A System That Incentivizes Mass Litigation
The numbers are damning. ADA lawsuits have increased 320% since 2013, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform. There was a massive increase in 2018 (177%). And, in 2020 alone, 85% of web accessibility lawsuits were concentrated in California, New York, and Florida, with many filed by the same firms using identical templates.
Mizrahi Kroub, Kevin W. Puckett, and Gregory S. Sconzo are at the forefront of this trend, firing off demand letters faster than businesses can respond. The ensuing lawsuits, should a settlement not be reached quickly, would appear to disproportionately engage small businesses, which lack the resources to mount a defense. From the outside looking in, the math appears fairly straightforward – they want to rattle small businesses so they ask for a large settlement, and ultimately settle for $5,000 to $10,000 as quickly as possible. It’s a high-volume legal model that incentivizes rapid settlements.
March 1st, 2025 edit: After being live for only 4 months, 3 different small businesses have reached out to me to share their experiences dealing with these types of ADA legal demands from the named entities in this article.
Some Accessibility Advocates Face Scrutiny Themselves
The hypocrisy of these lawyers extends beyond their websites. Their lawsuits rarely lead to better accessibility. Instead, settlements line their pockets while leaving websites unchanged.
"We want to make our site accessible," said a victimized founder. "But these lawyers don’t want solutions; they want payouts."
This pattern undermines the ADA’s original intent and erodes trust in the legal system.
Conclusion: Exposing High-Volume ADA Litigation for What It Is
ADA lawsuits were designed to promote inclusivity, not to create a cottage industry of aggressive legal tactics that disproportionately burden small businesses. Yet firms like Mizrahi Kroub, Kevin W. Puckett’s, and Gregory S. Sconzo’s have capitalized on the structure of ADA law which incentivizes rapid settlements over drawn-out litigation, turning enforcement into a high-volume settlement machine.
Their approach follows a repeatable formula: send demand letters, claim non-compliance, push for settlements, and move on to the next business. While they frame themselves as champions of accessibility, many small businesses report that these lawsuits result in little or no actual improvement to website usability—just payouts.
And the numbers back it up. The explosion of ADA website lawsuits—over 100,000 annually—demonstrates that this is not about accessibility reform, but about a mass litigation model that capitalizes on fear, cost, and exhaustion. This practice disproportionately impacts small businesses, which often lack the financial or legal resources to fight back.
As more business owners come forward, a pattern emerges—a system that prioritizes settlements over solutions, financial gain over accessibility progress. Holding these firms accountable means exposing the cycle they depend on: threats, pressure, and fast settlements that fuel their ability to continue targeting more businesses.
But this doesn’t have to be the norm. If you’ve received an ADA demand letter, know that you’re not alone. Seek legal counsel, push for transparency, and demand that these firms provide more than vague threats and boilerplate complaints. The more businesses push back, the harder it becomes for firms to operate unchecked in this space.
The ADA was built to ensure accessibility, not to create a legal assembly line that churns through defendants without delivering real change. It’s time to call out firms profiting from ambiguity and fear—and to demand that ADA enforcement leads to meaningful, measurable improvements rather than just another invoice.
If you’d like to discuss further or be introduced to other businesses who have faced the same tactics, reach out to me at jamesgriffincole@gmail.com.