Skip to content

Website lawsuits by industry

Website lawsuits against salons, spas and beauty

Two kinds of website lawsuit are filed against businesses every week: over tracking scripts that run before a visitor agrees, and over accessibility failures. See who was sued, then check your own site.

Free, about a minute, no signup for your score.

Verified filings against salons, spas and beauty

Accessibility (ADA)

30 days
0
90 days
2
12 months
18

Tracking (CIPA)

30 days
0
90 days
1
12 months
3

Filings by month, last 12 months

Updated Sep 14, 2026How cases are verified

The short answer

Suitcast counts 18 website accessibility lawsuits in the last 12 months and 3 website tracking lawsuits in the last 12 months against salons, spas and beauty, verified from federal court records and sourced state filings. The most active plaintiff firm is Equal Access Law Group PLLC. Counts refresh daily and are a floor, because state-court coverage is partial.

Trend

Filings against salons, spas and beauty, month by month

Accessibility and tracking filings stacked by the month they were filed.

Website accessibility (ADA) Website tracking (CIPA)

October 2025 to September 2026, current month to date

Who files

Who files against salons, spas and beauty

Plaintiff firms and repeat plaintiffs with verified filings against this industry in the last 12 months.

Most active plaintiff firms against salons, spas and beauty

Verified filings, last 12 months
  1. 1Equal Access Law Group PLLC6
  2. 2Gottlieb & Associates4
  3. 3Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC4
  4. 4Nye, Stirling, Hale, Miller & Sweet, LLP3
  5. 5Horowitz Law, PLLC1

Repeat plaintiffs against salons, spas and beauty

Three or more filings, 12 months

No repeat plaintiff here yet

Named plaintiffs appear once they have three or more verified filings against salons, spas and beauty in 12 months. Most website suits are filed by a small group of repeat plaintiffs.

Court records

Latest verified filings against salons, spas and beauty

Newest first. Every row links to the court record.
  1. Accessibility

    Russo v. M&S Skin Care, LLC

    S.D. New York, filed by Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Russo v. M&S Skin Care, LLC (opens in a new tab)
  2. Accessibility

    Thomas v. MSS Beauty, Inc.

    S.D. New York, filed by Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Thomas v. MSS Beauty, Inc. (opens in a new tab)
  3. Tracking

    Hartigan v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc.

    S.D. California

    Court recordfor Hartigan v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc. (opens in a new tab)
  4. Accessibility

    Jackson v. The Spa and Sauna Co. LLC

    N.D. Illinois, filed by Nye, Stirling, Hale, Miller & Sweet, LLP. Attributed to Illinois

    Court recordfor Jackson v. The Spa and Sauna Co. LLC (opens in a new tab)
  5. Tracking

    Asercion v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc.

    N.D. California

    Court recordfor Asercion v. Ulta Salon, Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc. (opens in a new tab)
  6. Accessibility

    Randolph v. Dime Beauty Co. LLC

    N.D. Illinois, filed by Horowitz Law, PLLC. Attributed to Illinois

    Court recordfor Randolph v. Dime Beauty Co. LLC (opens in a new tab)
  7. Accessibility

    Pittman v. Beauty Care Choices

    N.D. Illinois, filed by Fisher & Phillips, LLP. Attributed to Illinois

    Court recordfor Pittman v. Beauty Care Choices (opens in a new tab)
  8. Accessibility

    Cruz v. Rosie Jane Cosmetics Inc

    E.D. Wisconsin, filed by Equal Access Law Group PLLC. Attributed to Wisconsin

    Court recordfor Cruz v. Rosie Jane Cosmetics Inc (opens in a new tab)
  9. Accessibility

    Hippe v. Ofra Cosmetics LLC

    E.D. Wisconsin, filed by Equal Access Law Group PLLC. Attributed to Wisconsin

    Court recordfor Hippe v. Ofra Cosmetics LLC (opens in a new tab)
  10. Accessibility

    Murphy v. The Hair Doc Bass Brushes Inc.

    S.D. New York, filed by Gottlieb & Associates. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Murphy v. The Hair Doc Bass Brushes Inc. (opens in a new tab)
  11. Accessibility

    Walker v. Inn Beauty Lab Inc.

    N.D. Illinois, filed by Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP. Attributed to Illinois

    Court recordfor Walker v. Inn Beauty Lab Inc. (opens in a new tab)
  12. Accessibility

    SUCHENKO v. CLEAN BEAUTY COLLECTIVE, INC.

    W.D. Pennsylvania, filed by Nye, Stirling, Hale, Miller & Sweet, LLP. Attributed to Pennsylvania

    Court recordfor SUCHENKO v. CLEAN BEAUTY COLLECTIVE, INC. (opens in a new tab)
  13. Accessibility

    Young v. Loops Beauty, LLC

    S.D. New York, filed by Gottlieb & Associates. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Young v. Loops Beauty, LLC (opens in a new tab)
  14. Tracking

    Benjamin Brayfield v. Advanced Hair Restoration, LLC

    C.D. California

    Court recordfor Benjamin Brayfield v. Advanced Hair Restoration, LLC (opens in a new tab)
  15. Accessibility

    Rice v. Innovative Salon Products Inc

    E.D. Wisconsin, filed by Nye, Stirling, Hale, Miller & Sweet, LLP. Attributed to Wisconsin

    Court recordfor Rice v. Innovative Salon Products Inc (opens in a new tab)
  16. Accessibility

    Echols v. Clean Beauty for All, Inc.

    N.D. Illinois, filed by Equal Access Law Group, Pllc. Attributed to Illinois

    Court recordfor Echols v. Clean Beauty for All, Inc. (opens in a new tab)
  17. Accessibility

    Towns v. Im Pro Makeup NY LP

    S.D. New York, filed by Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Towns v. Im Pro Makeup NY LP (opens in a new tab)
  18. Accessibility

    Towns v. Offspring Beauty Co.

    S.D. New York, filed by Joseph & Norinsberg, LLC. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Towns v. Offspring Beauty Co. (opens in a new tab)
  19. Accessibility

    Crumwell v. Youth Beauty Corporation

    S.D. New York, filed by Gottlieb & Associates. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Crumwell v. Youth Beauty Corporation (opens in a new tab)
  20. Accessibility

    Echols v. Beauty Bioscience, LLC

    N.D. Illinois, filed by Equal Access Law Group PLLC. Attributed to Illinois

    Court recordfor Echols v. Beauty Bioscience, LLC (opens in a new tab)
  21. Accessibility

    Fernandez Martinez v. Colourpop Cosmetics, LLC

    S.D. New York, filed by Gottlieb & Associates. Attributed to New York

    Court recordfor Fernandez Martinez v. Colourpop Cosmetics, LLC (opens in a new tab)

Other industries

Website lawsuits in other industries

Each industry page counts its own filings, firms and repeat plaintiffs.

Questions owners ask

Why salons, spas and beauty are sued over their websites, and how these numbers are built.
Why are salons, spas and beauty sued over their websites?
Because they run the tools complaints name: booking or contact forms without labels, image-heavy pages without descriptions, and marketing pixels or chat widgets that load before a visitor consents. Plaintiff firms search for those patterns and file in batches, which is why the same industry shows up repeatedly in a month.
How is the industry determined?
From the defendant's name and, when the complaint is available, its description of the business, mapped to one of twenty industry groups. Cases whose industry cannot be determined are counted in state totals but not on industry pages.
Does this list include state-court cases?
Partly. Federal filings are complete for what CourtListener publishes; state filings are added weekly from public sources with a link on each row. Every count carries that note.

Keep going

Check your website before a firm does

The free scan loads five public pages, lists the trackers that fire before consent and the accessibility failures complaints cite, and matches them to filings against salons, spas and beauty.

Free, about a minute, no signup for your score.

Suitcast identifies risk indicators. It is not legal advice and does not determine compliance.