MARTINEZ v. TABLE BLUFF BREWING, INC.

/ Beverages / By

Plaintiff

  • Name: Abelardo Martinez, Jr.
  • Filing date: January 25, 2021
  • State of filing: California

Defendant

  • Name: Table Bluff Brewing Inc.
  • Website: www.lostcoast.com
  • Industry: Beverages
  • Summary: Table Bluff Brewing brews, bottles, and sells Lost Coast beers at retail and via its website.

Case Summary

On January 25, 2021, Abelardo Martinez, Jr. filed a Complaint in California State court against Table Bluff Brewing Inc.. Plaintiff Abelardo Martinez, Jr. alleges that www.lostcoast.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.0, WCAG 2.1, Section 508 accessibility standard(s).

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

  • Missing alternative text which presents a problem because an image without alternative text results in an empty link
  • Linked image missing alternative text which presents a problem because an image without alternative text results in an empty link.
  • Empty or missing form labels which presents a problem because, if a form control does not have a properly associated text label, the function or purpose of that form control may not be presented to screen reader users. Form labels provide visible descriptions and larger clickable targets for form controls;
  • Language missing or invalid which presents a problem because the language of the document is not identified or a lan attribute value is invalid. Identifying the language of the page or page elements allows screen readers to read the content in the appropriate language
  • Empty links which present a problem because a link contains no text. If a link contains no text, the function or purpose of the link will not be presented to the user. This can introduce confusion for keyboard and screen reader users;
  • Broken slip link, which presents a problem because the target for the link does not exist or the link is not keyboard accessible. A link to jump over navigation or jump to the main content of the page assists keyboard users only if the link is properly functioning and is keyboard accessible; and
  • Redundant Links where adjacent links go to the same URL address which results in additional
    navigation and repetition for keyboard and screen reader users.

Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:

  • Violation of 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181 et seq. – Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act
  • Violation of New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law Article 15 (Executive Law § 292 et seq.)
  • Violation of New York State Civil Rights Law, NY CLS Civ R, Article 4 (CLS Civ R § 40 et seq.)
  • Violation of New York City Human Rights Law, N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-102, et seq.
  • Declaratory Relief

Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

  • A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, et
    seq., and N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York;
  • A preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Defendant to take all the steps necessary to make its App into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that the App is readily accessible to and usable by blind individuals;
  • A declaration that Defendant owns, maintains and/or operates its App in a manner which discriminates against the blind and which fails to provide access for persons with disabilities as required by Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, et seq., and N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York;
  • An order directing Defendants to continually update and maintain its App to ensure that it remains fully accessible to and usable by the visually-impaired;
  • Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory damages and fines, to Plaintiff for violations of their civil rights under New York State Human Rights Law and City Law;
  • Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs of suit as provided by state and federal law;
  • For pre- and post-judgment interest to the extent permitted by law; and
  • For such other and further relief which this court deems just and proper.