As ADA Compliance Lawsuits Loom, Covered Organizations Scrutinize Website Accessibility
A recent spike in website-related ADA lawsuits is forcing many organizations to rethink their approach to online accessibility.
February 22, 2018 at 08:00 AM
5 minute read
When the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was first adopted in 1990, equal access for disabled individuals was largely a question of physical access. ADA claims largely centered around the rights of disabled people to access buildings, job opportunities and critical information as any other citizen would.
Since then, the digital world has expanded enormously, and with it, a whole other infrastructure for Americans with disabilities to navigate. Moreover, given the breakneck pace of technology and web innovation, trying to keep technology ADA-accessible has created some serious headaches for organizations.
Litigation surrounding ADA claims have long been a staple of physical access, but Cole Schotz attorney Scott Topolski noted that these lawsuits are increasingly pushing into the digital realm. “The big trend these days is website lawsuits, the allegation being that the websites are not fully accessible to visually impaired people,” he explained.
Most of these claims, as Topolski noted, stem from blind or visually impaired individuals who cannot get access to services online by using a screen reader, which can narrate the content of websites out loud. A report produced by Seyfarth Shaw found that in 2017 alone, plaintiffs filed 814 federal lawsuits citing inaccessible websites under the ADA.
Seyfarth Shaw partner and report author Minh Vu added that these lawsuits aren't just going away, either. “Plaintiffs have been doing well at resisting motions to dismiss early. Very well,” she said. “What that means is that you're not getting rid of a case early; you're going to end up litigating this issue.”
Thus far, only one of these claims has gone to trial. A Miami federal court decision last year ruled that supermarket chain Winn-Dixie Stores violated a blind customer's rights under the ADA because its website was incompatible with the customer's screen reader software.
Part of the problem lies in the fact that at present, there are no established federal guidelines for how to make a website accessible to disabled individuals. Although the Obama administration recommended that websites adopt the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), it did not adopt the rules as a formalized regulation. The Trump administration has since formally deprioritized the issue, saying that the Department of Justice (DOJ) would be “evaluating whether promulgating regulations about the accessibility of web information and services is necessary and appropriate.”
Richik Sarkar, member at McGlinchey Stafford, noted that many businesses have waited to take formal action to make their web services accessible to disabled users in hopes that formal rules would be put forth from the DOJ. The DOJ's decision not to issue these guidelines has reignited some conversation among attorneys as to the importance of formal guidelines to begin with.
Sarkar noted that while he's not typically of the mind that unrestrained free markets are always the answer, “This actually is an area where the market will take care of itself.” Technologists and web developers that fail to make their content accessible could lose out on a potential consumer base to a competitor with accessible content. “They have no real interest in excluding everyone,” Sarkar noted.
In Vu's mind, the issue is a little more complicated because of the way that supply chains around websites work. Retailers covered by the ADA often generate their web content through third-party developers, groups that may not be subject to the same regulatory requirements in developing their product. That could make it more difficult for companies to pressure third-party developers to create accessible technology for them.
“The customers don't really have a lot of leverage. Businesses can say, 'Too bad, then don't buy it,'” she said.
But, he added, “I think covered businesses are now having this realization that they need to take action on their websites and digital properties now, because there are not going to be any regulations to come out.”
Figuring out how to take that action could be tricky for some organizations. At this point, Topolski doesn't really see much of a unified strategy from ADA-covered organizations in how to handle these lawsuits. “It is a really fairly new trend, I don't know that there has been any type of dominant response to this,” he said.
Topolski, Sarkar and Vu all suggested that organizations may want to hire web accessibility consultants who can audit and identify potential problems. Even then, however, the rate of change in web design standards can make this issue difficult and expensive for organizations.
“The people who are going to be more at risk are middle market companies, where they don't have the internal resources to maintain these sites,” Sarkar said.
Vu said that these organizations may want to start carving out the resources to address this issue regardless. “Our advice is, the time is here to go ahead and work on making your website accessible. Until your website is accessible, the lawsuits are going to keep coming. The lawsuits are going to keep coming anyway, but then you're in a better position to defend them,” she said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1On the Move and After Hours: Meyner and Landis; Cooper Levenson; Ogletree Deakins; Saiber
- 2State Budget Proposal Includes More Money for Courts—for Now
- 3$5 Million Settlement Reached With Stone Academy
- 4$15K Family Vacation Turned 'Colossal Nightmare': Lawsuit Filed Against Vail Ski Resorts
- 5Prepare Your Entries! The California Legal Awards Have a New, February Deadline
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250