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: a haircare services provider

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed May 27, 2020

Plaintiff's Firm: J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC

WCAG 2.1 AAKeyboard Navigation FailureScreen Reader Focus Order IssuesMissing Accessible NamesConfusing Button Labels

Case Summary

Plaintiff Windy Lucius filed a lawsuit against a haircare services provider in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida on May 27, 2020. The complaint alleges violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., due to the inaccessibility of the defendant's mobile application to visually impaired users.

The complaint details several specific WCAG 2.1 A and AA guideline violations within the mobile application. These include a lack of focusability for locations content for VoiceOver users, a confusing focus order where content is read row-by-row instead of by logical units, map pins without accessible names, and actionable elements that lack a button role to inform VoiceOver users. Additionally, buttons throughout the application are announced with a confusing prefix, such as "ike search," making their function unclear.

This action highlights the significant legal exposure for businesses that offer digital platforms, such as mobile applications, as extensions of their public accommodations. Such entities must ensure their digital services are fully accessible and independently usable by individuals with disabilities to comply with ADA Title III and avoid similar litigation, emphasizing the need for comprehensive accessibility audits and remediation.

Case Q&A

What specific WCAG violations is this haircare services app accused of?

The app is accused of violating WCAG 2.1 A and AA guidelines, specifically issues with content focusability for VoiceOver, illogical focus order, missing accessible names for map pins, incorrect role assignment for actionable elements, and confusing button labels.

Who filed this lawsuit, and which law firm?

Windy Lucius filed this lawsuit, represented by J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC.

What legal risk does this create?

This lawsuit demonstrates the legal risk for businesses operating mobile applications linked to physical public accommodations. Such apps must comply with ADA Title III and WCAG standards to ensure full accessibility for disabled users, particularly those relying on screen reader software, or face potential legal action.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: a haircare services provi.... 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