Citation of law

537.1250. Citation of law — definitions — civil action by attorney general — considerations — safe harbor provision — attorney's fees and costs, punitive damages — contingent expiration — applicability. — 1. (1) This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Act Against Abusive Website or Web Content Access Litigation".

(2) As used in this section, the following terms mean:

(a) "Access violation", any allegation that a website or web content fails to comply with the accessibility requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act or under state law;

(b) "Resident of this state", any individual residing in Missouri; any entity that has registered with the Missouri secretary of state's office; or the state of Missouri or any political subdivision thereof, including all boards, commissions, agencies, institutions, authorities, and bodies politic and corporate of the state created by or in accordance with state law or regulations.

2. (1) The attorney general under section 507.070 on behalf of a class of residents of this state who are subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, or any resident of this state who is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, may file a civil action in any court of competent jurisdiction within this state against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website or web content access violation is abusive litigation.

(2) In determining whether any litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation constitutes abusive litigation, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to determine if the primary purpose of the litigation that alleges a website or web content access violation is obtaining a payment from a defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court. For the purposes of making this determination, the court may assess the following factors and any other factors the court deems relevant for assessing:

(a) Whether the same plaintiff, attorney, or law firm has filed a high number of substantially similar lawsuits without meaningful efforts to resolve or improve accessibility;

(b) Whether the plaintiff provided the defendant with reasonable notice and an opportunity to correct the alleged barrier prior to filing suit;

(c) Any history of sanctions or findings of bad faith against the plaintiff or counsel;

(d) The nature of settlement discussions and the reasonableness of settlement offers and refusals to settle. The application of such settlement information shall be used only as provided by this section and shall not otherwise alter the rules of evidence applicable to such court; and

(e) Whether any factors under Missouri supreme court rule 55.03(b) exist in the litigation and whether sanctions are appropriate under Missouri supreme court rule 55.03(c).

(3) A defendant who receives written notice of an alleged website or web content access violation and in good faith initiates substantial steps to correct it within ninety days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website or web content access violation is abusive. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the expiration of the ninety-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith. There shall not be a rebuttable presumption that such litigation is abusive litigation if the alleged website or web content access violation is not corrected, as determined by the court, within ninety days after being provided written notice or being served a petition or complaint with sufficient detail to identify and correct the alleged access violation. The trier of fact shall not determine whether such litigation is abusive litigation until after such ninety-day period expires or the alleged access violation is corrected, as determined by the court, whichever occurs first. This subdivision shall be known and may be cited as the "Safe Harbor Provision".

3. The attorney general may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents or entities that are the targets of abusive website or web content access litigation as defined in this section. The attorney general may also issue guidance or determinations clarifying when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such determinations shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.

4. If the trier of fact determines that an initiator of an action under subsection 2 of this section is a defendant in abusive litigation, the court may award reasonable attorney's fees and costs in bringing the action under subsection 2 of this section as well as defending against the abusive litigation to be paid by the party bringing the abusive litigation. In addition, the court may award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.

5. At the conclusion of the litigation alleging a website or web content access violation, the court shall review any determination that such litigation is abusive and any award of attorney's fees under the Missouri supreme court rules of professional conduct to determine the reasonableness of the award before issuing a judgment.

6. If the United States Department of Justice issues standards concerning website or web content accessibility under Title III of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 12181 to 12189, the attorney general shall notify the revisor of statutes that such standards have been issued. Upon receipt of such notification by the revisor, the provisions of this section shall expire with respect to any entity that has registered with the Missouri secretary of state's office or the state of Missouri or any political subdivision thereof, including all boards, commissions, agencies, institutions, authorities, and bodies politic and corporate of the state created by or in accordance with state law or regulations.

7. This section shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026. The provisions of subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of this section shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of this section prior to August 28, 2026, or that is within the ninety-day correction period after August 28, 2026.