Americans with Disabilities Act website lawsuits are all the rage in Florida, California and New York state, but lawyers say a new phenomenon is emerging. Specifically in Florida, plaintiffs are tacking on trespass claims to their ADA lawsuits to obtain monetary damages.

To be sure, lawyers have noted a significant uptick in claims alleging websites aren't ADA compliant. With no slowdown in sight, plaintiff attorneys have lodged ADA claims at websites owned by Domino's, Beyoncé and many others. In response, most companies settle out of court to avoid costly litigation, but observers say plaintiffs in Florida have a new tactic to encourage higher settlements.

In those Florida suits, blind or visually impaired plaintiffs not only allege that the website they visited isn't ADA compliant, they also argue that cookies track their browsing without their consent, which they say constitutes a trespass, lawyers said.

Cole Schotz attorney Scott Topolski called the trespass claims an "inventive" approach unique to Florida filings to obtain monetary damages.

"California and New York don't have to do that; they have state equivalents to the ADA that actually provides for damages," he said. "Trespass, from what I've seen so far, has been a Florida-specific phenomena."

However, Topolski believes those claims likely won't prevail in a courtroom. "I think they won't ultimately survive [in court], but it's another mechanism to boost cases' values in these settlements," he said.

Miami-based solo practitioner Pelayo Duran disagreed. The plaintiff attorney, who has filed trespass and ADA website claims in Florida federal courtrooms, said a trespass claim isn't automatically frivolous.

"These individuals primarily are blind individuals," he said. "Because they are blind, they can't visually observe what is on the screen they receive."

Duran described how a screen reader's voice-over technology would read to a blind person and describe a website's images and words to help the person "conceptualize and understand what they are looking at." If the screen reader doesn't describe cookie-tracking consent, there's an issue, Duran said.

He and fellow Florida plaintiff attorney Rod Hannah cited a 2011 decision in Flagstone Island Gardens v. Ser in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida as noting cyber trespass is viable under Florida law.

They said the judge in Ser held a plaintiff's server qualifies as a chattel that can be subject to trespass. Hannah and Duran said they've defended their claims by citing Ser and cookie research.

Still, the plaintiffs and defense bar say the disagreement over trespass claims continues, and both sides welcome a court ruling to clarify confusion.

"Because it doesn't look likely a federal regulation is forthcoming and any state regulation would differ state-by-state, only a court case that goes all the way through the court system would be able to provide some clarity," said Berger Singerman partner Heidi Howard Tandy.

But Duran and Hannah said such trespass claims may become a thing of the past as the General Data Protection Regulation's cookie consent requirements stretch across the Atlantic.

"It's the same website site generally and its [cookie tracking is] regulated, and we've observed consent to be more prevalent," Duran said.