A federal lawsuit claims that a popular neighborhood café is inaccessible to people with disabilities, highlighting ongoing concerns about equal access to public spaces. The complaint was filed by Ashley Francis in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on March 5, 2026, naming Lucky of 195 Madison Street Roofing & Contracting Inc. and Lucky113Madison LLC—the owners and operators of The Mandarin café—as defendants.
According to the filing, Ashley Francis is a wheelchair user who lives in the Lower East Side section of New York City. She alleges that she cannot enter or use The Mandarin café at 113 Madison Street due to architectural barriers including a step at the entrance and other features that do not comply with federal, state, and city accessibility standards. The lawsuit asserts violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), the New York State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL).
The complaint outlines that both defendant companies own or lease the property where The Mandarin operates as a retail establishment serving coffee, tea, matcha, and pastries. Francis claims she resides about nine blocks from The Mandarin and passes by weekly but has been unable to patronize it because there is no wheelchair-accessible entrance. She states her intention to visit once an accessible entrance is provided.
Francis’s legal team details extensive renovations at The Mandarin in 2024 and 2025 totaling approximately $150,000 but alleges these did not address accessibility requirements mandated by law. The complaint lists over thirty specific alleged violations related to entrances, interior routes, seating areas, toilet facilities, signage for accessibility features, maneuvering clearances, table heights, knee clearances under tables and lavatories, as well as failure to provide required signage using the International Symbol of Accessibility.
The suit claims these conditions amount to ongoing discrimination: “Defendants made a financial decision to ignore the explicit legal requirements for making their place of public accommodation accessible to persons with disabilities — all in the hopes that they would never be caught.” It further alleges that “an entrance with a step is no different than a sign informing people with disabilities to ‘keep out.’”
Legal arguments in the filing emphasize joint liability between property owners and lessees under ADA regulations. Francis argues that neither party can escape responsibility through lease agreements. She also claims emotional distress resulting from being excluded from enjoying local businesses: “Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress including humiliation, embarrassment, stress, and anxiety.”
In addition to statutory violations under federal law (ADA), state law (NYSHRL), city law (NYCHRL), and civil rights statutes (§§ 40-c and 40-d), Francis brings a claim for common law negligence. She alleges that negligent design, construction, operation, repair, or maintenance has rendered The Mandarin unsafe for disabled patrons—causing her bodily injury—and asserts that defendants had actual or constructive notice of these dangers.
The plaintiff requests several forms of relief from the court:
– A declaratory judgment finding defendants in violation of relevant laws;
– A permanent injunction ordering closure until all violations are remedied;
– Orders requiring policy changes so disabled customers have full access;
– Compensatory damages for emotional distress;
– Punitive damages under city human rights law;
– Statutory penalties under state civil rights law;
– Attorney’s fees and costs;
– Ongoing court supervision until compliance is achieved.
Francis also demands a jury trial on all triable issues. Her attorneys are Glen H. Parker of The Parker Law Group P.C., based in Montclair, New Jersey. No judge name appears explicitly in this document; however, it is identified as Case 1:26-cv-01837.
Source: 126cv01837_Ashley_Francis_v_Lucky_of_195_Complaint_Southern_District_of_New_York.pdf
