Attorneys Fees - Title III ADA Claims: The Supreme Court rejects the catalyst theory, as the basis for an award of fees. 

A claimant under Title III of the ADA (discrimination by public accommodations) is not entitled to recover compensatory damages. But, the "prevailing party," is entitled to recover attorneys fees and cost.

What happens if all of the alleged barriers are removed, and the public accommodation is made to be ADA complaint before any judicial action occurs.

Can the ADA claimant still recover attorneys fees under the theory that they were the catalyst that brought about the desired change?

In Buckhannon Board and Care Home, Inc. v. W. Va. Dep’t of Health and Human Res., 532 U.S. 598 (2001) the Supreme Court rejected the catalyst theory holding that a defendant’s voluntary change in conduct, even if it accomplishes what the plaintiff sought to achieve by the lawsuit, lacks the necessary “judicial imprimatur” on the change. The Court ruled that the “clear meaning” of “prevailing party” in the fee-shifting statutes compelled such a conclusion. The critical factor is whether there is "judicially sanctioned change in the legal relationship of the parties."