A New York resident alleges that a popular Indian vegetarian restaurant and its property owner have failed to provide accessible facilities for people with disabilities, in violation of federal, state, and city laws. The complaint was filed by Namel Norris on March 8, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Veg Cafe Inc., doing business as Ananda, and A.B. Ilibassi Realty Company L.P.
According to the filing, Norris is a paraplegic who uses a wheelchair for mobility. He claims he personally visited the defendants’ property at 257 7th Avenue in New York but was denied full and equal access to the restaurant’s facilities due to architectural barriers. The lawsuit cites violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), and the New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL).
The complaint outlines several specific allegations regarding accessibility barriers at Ananda. These include a step at the entrance without an ADA-compliant ramp or wheelchair lift; lack of a safe means of egress; restroom doors without accessible handles; insufficient clearance under restroom lavatories; missing required grab bars around toilets; hand dryers placed at inaccessible heights; non-compliant sinks; inaccessible locking mechanisms on restroom doors; and unsecured floor mats at both interior and exterior entrances. Norris states that these conditions prevented him from entering or using the facility safely.
Norris describes himself as an award-winning hip-hop/rap recording artist who regularly visits Greenwich Village for shopping and dining with friends and colleagues. He asserts that he suffered an “injury in fact” as a result of being unable to enter Ananda due to these barriers. The complaint also references online reviews describing Ananda as a well-rated establishment offering vegan, gluten-free, Jain options, and authentic Indian cuisine.
The legal arguments presented by Norris rely on Title III of the ADA, which requires places of public accommodation to be accessible to individuals with disabilities since January 26, 1992. The complaint notes that failure to remove architectural barriers where removal is readily achievable constitutes discrimination under federal law. It further cites relevant sections of both city and state human rights laws prohibiting denial of accommodations based on disability.
Norris alleges that despite having had decades to comply with accessibility requirements, defendants have not made necessary modifications or undertaken sufficient efforts to address these issues. The complaint argues that this ongoing lack of compliance communicates to disabled persons that they are not welcome as patrons.
The lawsuit seeks several forms of relief from the court: a declaration that defendants’ property violates federal, state, and city disability laws; an order requiring alterations to make facilities accessible; directives for defendants to review their policies toward people with disabilities; compensatory damages totaling $1,500 under local human rights statutes plus punitive damages under city code; reasonable attorney’s fees; costs including expert fees; and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Attorneys B. Bradley Weitz (BW 9365) and Robert J. Mirel (RM 2974) of The Weitz Law Firm P.A., located in Aventura, Florida, represent Norris in this matter. The case is identified as Case No: 1:26-cv-01892.
Source: 126cv01892_Namel_Norris_v_Veg_Cafe_Complaint_Southern_District_of_New_York.pdf
