Schedule a Consultation: 858.483.9200
Web Accessibility Case Dismissed
Title III of the federal Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”) requires that businesses be accessible to those with disabilities. Of late, one of the thorny legal questions is whether the ADA requires that websites be accessible to those who are sight impaired and hearing impaired. The federal courts have been trending in the direction of saying “yes,” as long as there is some connection to a physical location. Previously, we discussed this issue here. A recent federal case decided in the Southern District of Florida highlights the trend and provides us an opportunity to write this follow up article. Since the ADA is a federal statute, Gomez will be another potentially persuasive case for federal courts here in California. In Gomez, the plaintiff’s case was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to state in his complaint that he had been to the physical location — a restaurant chain — or that he planned to visit one of the restaurants or that his inability to use the website impacted his ability to visit any of the restaurants. See Gomez v. Knife Management., LLC, Case No. 17-cv-23843-GAYLE (US S.D. Fla. September 14, 2018).
San Diego Corporate Law: Facts of Case
Gomez involved the website for The Knife Steakhouses, a chain of restaurants located mainly in the southeastern United States. The plaintiff, who is sight impaired, alleged in his complaint that he went to the website for The Knife Steakhouse and was unable to access it because it was not designed for the blind. Mr. Gomez uses a reader software called JAWS Screen Reader. Basically, the software converts the text into audible language. It is specifically designed for the visually impaired.
Earlier in the summer, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit had ruled in favor of a visually impaired plaintiff in a case against Dunkin Donuts. See Haynes v. Dunkin’ Donuts LLC, Court of Appeals, No. 18-10373, Non-Argument Calendar (11th Circuit July 31, 2018) (unpublished). In that case, the court held that a website was a “service that facilitates the use” of the physical coffees shops run by Dunkin Donuts. In the Dunkin’ Donuts case, the plaintiff alleged that his ability to find locations was impaired along with his ability to buy gift cards from the website. As such, the court held that the website “extended the reach of the physical, public accommodation to the online forum.” For those reasons, the court held that Dunkin Donuts had violated the ADA.
By contrast, as noted above, in Gomez’s case against The Knife Steakhouse, Mr. Gomez did not allege that he had any intent to go to any of the restaurants. The US District court reasoned that websites “… are not always public accommodations in the same way that ‘brick and mortar’ locations are.” Websites are only “public accommodations” if there is a connection or linkage to a physical location. Since Mr. Gomez did not claim he intended to visit any of the restaurants, his case was dismissed.
The issue of website accessibility is an ongoing concern for all San Diego businesses. It may be advisable, from the beginning, to design the company’s website to be accessible to the visually impaired. The software is readily available. Embedding the software from the start is cost effective and potentially avoids a costly lawsuit down the road.
Contact San Diego Corporate Law
For more information, contact attorney Michael Leonard, Esq., of San Diego Corporate Law. Mr. Leonard was recently named as “Best of the Bar” by the San Diego Business Journal for 2018. Mr. Leonard has received that honor for the past four years. Mr. Leonard can be reached at (858) 483-9200 or via email.
You Might Also Like:
Employee Social Media Account as Stolen Property?
Can My San Diego Teenager Form a Corporation and Start a Business?
California Federal Court: Calling a Soda “Diet” is Not False or Deceptive Advertising
Website Accessibility for California Businesses in Light of Wayfair, Inc.
