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: Mobile Haircare Service App

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed July 22, 2020

Plaintiff's Firm: J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC

WCAG 2.1 AWCAG 2.1 AANon-Text Content (WCAG 1.1.1)Focus Order (WCAG 2.4.3)Name Role Value (WCAG 4.1.2)Images of Text (WCAG 1.4.5)Screen Reader IncompatibilityADA Title III App

Case Summary

Plaintiff Windy Lucius has filed an ADA Title III accessibility lawsuit against a mobile haircare service app in the Southern District of Florida on July 22, 2020. The complaint alleges that the app, offered by an operator of hair salons, is not fully accessible to visually impaired consumers and fails to interact properly with Apple's assistive technology, denying equal access to its services and goods.

The complaint details several WCAG violations including issues with Non-Text Content (WCAG 1.1.1), where a "Gallery" icon is incorrectly announced as "gift" and images within a "Lookbook" are not announced. Focus Order (WCAG 2.4.3) is cited as problematic, making it difficult for screen reader users to purchase gift cards due to illogical navigation. Furthermore, Name, Role, Value (WCAG 4.1.2) violations include an inaccessible "Scratch Off Menu" and unannounced text, while Images of Text (WCAG 1.4.5) issues are present with unlabeled buttons and icons announced generically as "button."

This legal action underscores the significant legal risks for businesses operating mobile applications that fail to meet recognized accessibility standards like WCAG 2.1 A and AA. Similar service providers face potential ADA Title III lawsuits and demands for injunctive relief if their digital platforms do not ensure full and independent usability for individuals with disabilities, thereby preventing them from experiencing full and equal enjoyment of goods and services.

Case Q&A

What specific WCAG violations is this mobile haircare service app accused of?

The app is accused of WCAG 1.1.1 (Non-Text Content) for mislabeled icons and unannounced images, WCAG 2.4.3 (Focus Order) for illogical navigation during gift card purchases, WCAG 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value) for inaccessible menu items and unannounced text, and WCAG 1.4.5 (Images of Text) for unlabeled buttons.

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 creates a legal risk for mobile application developers and operators if their digital platforms fail to provide full and equal access for visually impaired users, potentially leading to similar ADA Title III lawsuits and requirements for injunctive relief.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: Mobile Haircare Service A.... 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