Official Summary Text
The following summaries of this bill are available:
Print All Summaries
Truly Agreed to and Finally Passed
Print
HCS/SS/SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website or Web Content Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state, the state, or a political subdivision that is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, or any resident of this state, the state, or a political subdivision of this state that is subject to litigation that alleges any website or web content access violation, may file a civil action 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. In determining whether a civil action alleging a website or web content access claim is considered abusive, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to find whether the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain payment from a defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination.
A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website or web content access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website or web content access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition.
Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith.
The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website or web content access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
The court may award attorney's fees and costs to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.
If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website or web content accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire with respect to any entity that has registered as a corporation with the Secretary of State's office, and the state and any political subdivision thereof.
This act shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026, and the 90-day correction period shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of this act prior to or within 90 days after such date.
This act is similar to SB 1471 (2026), HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), and HCS/HBs 1842 & 2150 (2026).
KATIE O'BRIEN
House Amendment
Print
HCS/SS/SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state, the state, or a political subdivision that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, or any resident of this state, the state, or a political subdivision of this state that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website access violation is abusive litigation. In determining whether a civil action alleging a website access claim is considered abusive, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to find whether the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain payment from a defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination.
A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition.
Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith.
The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
The court may award attorney's fees and costs to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.
If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire with respect to any entity that has registered as a corporation with the Secretary of State's office, and the state and any political subdivision thereof.
This act shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026, and the 90-day correction period shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of this act prior to or within 90 days after such date.
This act is similar to HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), and HCS/HBs 1842 & 2150 (2026).
KATIE O'BRIEN
HA #1: CHANGES THE TITLE OF THE ACT TO "RELATING TO ABUSIVE WEBSITE OR WEB CONTENT ACCESS LITIGATION"
HA #2: ADDS "OR WEB CONTENT" AFTER THE USE OF THE WORD "WEBSITE" THROUGHOUT THE ACT
House Committee Substitute
Print
HCS/SS/SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state, the state, or a political subdivision that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, or any resident of this state, the state, or a political subdivision of this state that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website access violation is abusive litigation. In determining whether a civil action alleging a website access claim is considered abusive, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to find whether the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain payment from a defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination.
A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition.
Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith.
The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
The court may award attorney's fees and costs to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.
If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire with respect to any entity that has registered as a corporation with the Secretary of State's office, and the state and any political subdivision thereof.
This act shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026, and the 90-day correction period shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of this act prior to or within 90 days after such date.
This act is similar to HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), and HCS/HBs 1842 & 2150 (2026).
KATIE O'BRIEN
Perfected
Print
SS/SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state, the state, or a political subdivision that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, or any resident of this state, the state, or a political subdivision of this state that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website access violation is abusive litigation. In determining whether a civil action alleging a website access claim is considered abusive, the court shall consider the totality of the circumstances to find whether the litigation was filed in good faith. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination.
A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition.
Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith.
The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
The court may award attorney's fees to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.
If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire with respect to any entity that has filed as a corporation with the Secretary of State's office.
This act shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026, and the 90-day correction period shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of this act prior to or within 90 days after such date.
This act is similar to HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), HB 1842 (2026), and HB 2150 (2026).
KATIE O'BRIEN
Senate Substitute
Print
SS/SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state, the state, or a political subdivision that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, or any resident of this state, the state, or a political subdivision of this state that is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website access violation is abusive litigation. A civil action alleging a website access claim is considered abusive only if the court, based on the totality of the circumstances, finds the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain a payment from the defendant. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination.
A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition.
Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith.
The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
The court may award attorney's fees to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.
If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire with respect to any entity that has filed as a corporation with the Secretary of State's office.
This act shall apply to litigation pending on August 28, 2026, and the 90-day correction period shall apply to any defendant in any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied with the requirements of this act prior to or within 90 days after such date.
This act is similar to HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), HB 1842 (2026), and HB 2150 (2026).
KATIE O'BRIEN
Senate Committee Substitute
Print
SCS/SBs 907, 1154 & 1272 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation". The Attorney General on behalf of a class of residents of this state who are subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, or any resident of this state who is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation, may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website access violation is abusive litigation. A civil action alleging a website access claim is considered abusive only if the court, based on the totality of the circumstances, finds the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain a payment from the defendant. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination.
A defendant who receives notice of an alleged website access violation and in good faith takes substantial steps to correct the violation within 90 days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any subsequent claim for a website access violation is abusive. There shall not be a presumption if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days after written notice or service of the petition.
Additionally, nothing in this act shall prevent a defendant from filing a motion to dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the end of the 90-day period, that the alleged access violation has been corrected in good faith.
The Attorney General may intervene or bring an action on behalf of Missouri residents that are targets of abusive website access litigation. The Attorney General may also issue guidance as to when litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such guidance shall not preclude legitimate accessibility enforcement actions.
The court may award attorney's fees to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.
If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire.
This act is similar to HCS/HBs 1694, 1674, 1780, 2056, 2312 & 1755 (2026), HB 1842 (2026), and HB 2150 (2026).
KATIE O'BRIEN
Introduced
Print
SB 907 - This act creates the "Act Against Abusive Website Access Litigation". The Attorney General, on behalf of a class of residents of this state, or any resident of this state who is subject to litigation that alleges any website access violation may file a civil action against the party, attorney, or law firm that initiated such litigation for a determination as to whether such litigation alleging a website access violation is abusive litigation. In determining whether such litigation is abusive, the trier of fact shall consider the totality of the circumstances to determine if the primary purpose of the litigation was to obtain a payment from the defendant due to the costs of defending the action in court. The act describes the factors to be considered in making this determination.
If the defendant in a website access violation case attempts to correct the alleged violation within 30 days of being provided notice, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the subsequent initiation or continuance of litigation constitutes abusive litigation. Such presumption shall not exist if the alleged violation is not corrected within 90 days under circumstances described in the act. If the Attorney General determines that the website access litigation is not abusive, then there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the litigation is not abusive.
The court may award attorney's fees to the party defending against the abusive litigation. The court may also award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court.
If the U.S. Department of Justice issues standards concerning website accessibility under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the provisions of this act shall expire.
This act is identical to HB 1674 (2026), HB 1755 (2026), HB 1780 (2026), HB 1842 (2026), HB 2150 (2026), and HB 2312 (2026), is substantially similar to SB 1272 (2026) and HB 2056 (2026), and is similar to SB 1154 (2026) and HB 1694 (2026).
KATIE O'BRIEN
Current Bill Text
Read the full stored bill text
SECOND REGULAR SESSION
[TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]
HOUSE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR
SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR
SENATE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR
SENATE BILLS NOS. 907,
1154 & 1272
103RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY
2026
5627H.09T
AN ACT
To amend chapter 537, RSMo, by adding thereto one new section relating to abusive website or
web content access litigation.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Missouri, as follows:
Section A. Chapter 537, RSMo, is amended by adding thereto 1
one new section, to be known as section 537.1250, to read as 2
follows:3
537.1250. 1. (1) This section shall be known and may 1
be cited as the "Act Against Abusive Website or Web Content 2
Access Litigation". 3
(2) As used in this section, the following terms mean: 4
(a) "Access violation", any allegation that a website 5
or web content fails to comply with the accessibility 6
requirements of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act 7
or under state law; 8
(b) "Resident of this state", any individual residing 9
in Missouri; any entity that has registered with the 10
Missouri secretary of state's office; or the state of 11
Missouri or any political subdivision thereof, including all 12
HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 2
1154 & 1272
boards, commissions, agencies, institutions, authorities, 13
and bodies politic and corporate of the state created by or 14
in accordance with state law or regulations. 15
2. (1) The attorney general under section 507.070 on 16
behalf of a class of residents of this state who are subject 17
to litigation that alleges any website or web content access 18
violation, or any resident of this state who is subject to 19
litigation that alleges any website or web content access 20
violation, may file a civil action in any court of competent 21
jurisdiction within this state against the party, attorney, 22
or law firm that initiated such litigation for a 23
determination as to whether such litigation alleging a 24
website or web content access violation is abusive 25
litigation. 26
(2) In determining whether any litigation that alleges 27
any website or web content access violation constitutes 28
abusive litigation, the court shall consider the totality of 29
the circumstances to determine if the primary purpose of the 30
litigation that alleges a website or web content access 31
violation is obtaining a payment from a defendant due to the 32
costs of defending the action in court. For the purposes of 33
making this determination, the court may assess the 34
following factors and any other factors the court deems 35
relevant for assessing: 36
(a) Whether the same plaintiff, attorney, or law firm 37
has filed a high number of substantially similar lawsuits 38
without meaningful efforts to resolve or improve 39
accessibility; 40
(b) Whether the plaintiff provided the defendant with 41
reasonable notice and an opportunity to correct the alleged 42
barrier prior to filing suit; 43
HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 3
1154 & 1272
(c) Any history of sanctions or findings of bad faith 44
against the plaintiff or counsel; 45
(d) The nature of settlement discussions and the 46
reasonableness of settlement offers and refusals to settle. 47
The application of such settlement information shall be used 48
only as provided by this section and shall not otherwise 49
alter the rules of evidence applicable to such court; and 50
(e) Whether any factors under Missouri supreme court 51
rule 55.03(b) exist in the litigation and whether sanctions 52
are appropriate under Missouri supreme court rule 55.03(c). 53
(3) A defendant who receives written notice of an 54
alleged website or web content access violation and in good 55
faith initiates substantial steps to correct it within 56
ninety days shall have a rebuttable presumption that any 57
subsequent claim for a website or web content access 58
violation is abusive. Nothing in this section shall be 59
construed to prohibit a defendant from filing a motion to 60
dismiss or from notifying the plaintiff, prior to the 61
expiration of the ninety-day period, that the alleged access 62
violation has been corrected in good faith. There shall not 63
be a rebuttable presumption that such litigation is abusive 64
litigation if the alleged website or web content access 65
violation is not corrected, as determined by the court, 66
within ninety days after being provided written notice or 67
being served a petition or complaint with sufficient detail 68
to identify and correct the alleged access violation. The 69
trier of fact shall not determine whether such litigation is 70
abusive litigation until after such ninety-day period 71
expires or the alleged access violation is corrected, as 72
determined by the court, whichever occurs first. This 73
subdivision shall be known and may be cited as the "Safe 74
Harbor Provision". 75
HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 4
1154 & 1272
3. The attorney general may intervene or bring an 76
action on behalf of Missouri residents or entities that are 77
the targets of abusive website or web content access 78
litigation as defined in this section. The attorney general 79
may also issue guidance or determinations clarifying when 80
litigation practices are deemed abusive, but such 81
determinations shall not preclude legitimate accessibility 82
enforcement actions. 83
4. If the trier of fact determines that an initiator 84
of an action under subsection 2 of this section is a 85
defendant in abusive litigation, the court may award 86
reasonable attorney's fees and costs in bringing the action 87
under subsection 2 of this section as well as defending 88
against the abusive litigation to be paid by the party 89
bringing the abusive litigation. In addition, the court may 90
award punitive damages or sanctions not to exceed three 91
times the amount of attorney's fees awarded by the court. 92
5. At the conclusion of the litigation alleging a 93
website or web content access violation, the court shall 94
review any determination that such litigation is abusive and 95
any award of attorney's fees under the Missouri supreme 96
court rules of professional conduct to determine the 97
reasonableness of the award before issuing a judgment. 98
6. If the United States Department of Justice issues 99
standards concerning website or web content accessibility 100
under Title III of the federal Americans with Disabilities 101
Act, 42 U.S.C. Sections 12181 to 12189, the attorney general 102
shall notify the revisor of statutes that such standards 103
have been issued. Upon receipt of such notification by the 104
revisor, the provisions of this section shall expire with 105
respect to any entity that has registered with the Missouri 106
secretary of state's office or the state of Missouri or any 107
HCS SS SCS SBs 907, 5
1154 & 1272
political subdivision thereof, including all boards, 108
commissions, agencies, institutions, authorities, and bodies 109
politic and corporate of the state created by or in 110
accordance with state law or regulations. 111
7. This section shall apply to litigation pending on 112
August 28, 2026. The provisions of subdivision (3) of 113
subsection 2 of this section shall apply to any defendant in 114
any pending litigation on August 28, 2026, that has complied 115
with the requirements of subdivision (3) of subsection 2 of 116
this section prior to August 28, 2026, or that is within the 117
ninety-day correction period after August 28, 2026. 118