Received a Demand Letter? Get Immediate Defense Help →

Informational only — not legal advice. Data from public PACER/CourtListener records. Full disclaimer →

ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: An Online Flower Retailer

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed March 23, 2020

Plaintiff's Firm: J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC

WCAG 2.1 AAMissing Alt TextKeyboard Navigation FailureInput Labeling IssuesScreen Reader Incompatibility

Case Summary

Plaintiff Windy Lucius filed a federal lawsuit against an online flower retailer in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, on March 23, 2020. The complaint alleges violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) due to the inaccessibility of the retailer's mobile application.

The lawsuit specifically identifies several WCAG 2.1 A and WCAG 2.1 AA violations. These include the absence of text alternatives for non-text content, such as product images announced as "Testing, image, night sky," and a lack of proper context announcement for dates with tabular appearance where only the visible number is read. Additionally, the application uses color as the sole means to differentiate charges (standard vs. surcharge), input buttons are not properly labeled, and elements are not individually focusable with screen reader software, leading to keyboard trap issues. The app also fails to provide accessible names for components with text or images of text and does not provide state information for products, making users unsure of selected options. Furthermore, the app uses images of text without accessible alternatives.

This action highlights the significant legal risks for businesses operating e-commerce websites and mobile applications that fail to ensure full accessibility for visually impaired consumers. Companies in the online retail sector must prioritize compliance with ADA Title III and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) to avoid similar litigation, ensuring their digital platforms are independently usable by all individuals, including those who rely on assistive technologies like screen readers.

Case Q&A

What specific WCAG violations is this online flower retailer accused of?

The online flower retailer is accused of WCAG 2.1 A and AA violations including: lack of text alternatives for non-text content (e.g., product images), insufficient context for dates in tabular appearance, reliance solely on color for differentiation (e.g., pricing), unlabeled input buttons, elements not individually focusable with VoiceOver, keyboard trap issues, missing accessible names for components, and the use of images of text without accessible alternatives.

Who filed this lawsuit, and which law firm?

This lawsuit was filed by Windy Lucius, represented by the law firm J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC.

What legal risk does this create?

This case underscores the ongoing legal risk for online retailers and digital platforms that do not maintain accessible websites and mobile applications. It demonstrates that failure to comply with ADA Title III and WCAG standards can lead to lawsuits and demands for injunctive relief, requiring significant overhauls to digital infrastructure to ensure equal access for individuals with disabilities.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: An Online Flower Retailer. Ask me about the plaintiff's law firm, the specific WCAG violations at risk, or how to protect your business. I cite real lawsuit patterns — not generic advice.

Not legal advice — informational intelligence only.

TDARI is not a law firm. Responses are AI-generated intelligence, not legal advice. Disclaimer