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 Footwear Retailer

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed August 13, 2020

Plaintiff's Firm: Acacia Barros, P.A.

WCAG 2.0 AAMissing Alt TextInaccessible Form FieldsFocusable Hidden ContentScreen Reader Incompatibility

Case Summary

Plaintiff Raymond T. Mahlberg, represented by Acacia Barros, P.A., filed a federal lawsuit against an online footwear retailer in the Southern District of Florida on August 13, 2020. The complaint alleges that the e-commerce website is not fully or equally accessible to visually impaired consumers, thereby violating Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

The lawsuit specifically identifies several WCAG 2.0 violations, including img elements lacking accessible names (WCAG 2.0 F65), input fields in groups without accessible names (WCAG 2.0 F86), visual labels not appearing in the accessible names of links and controls (WCAG 2.0 A F96), blank label elements (WCAG 2.0 A 4.12), and aria-hidden elements containing focusable content (WCAG 2.0 A 1.3.1). These digital barriers prevent screen-reading software from effectively conveying website content, denying the plaintiff full and equal access.

This case highlights the significant legal risks faced by businesses operating digital platforms that fail to adhere to established accessibility guidelines. Companies in the retail and e-commerce sector must ensure their websites provide effective communication and equal access to all users, including those with visual impairments, to avoid potential lawsuits, injunctive relief, and the associated costs and reputational damage.

Case Q&A

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

The retailer is accused of img elements lacking accessible names (WCAG 2.0 F65), input fields in groups without accessible names (WCAG 2.0 F86), visual labels not appearing in the accessible names of links and controls (WCAG 2.0 A F96), blank label elements (WCAG 2.0 A 4.12), and aria-hidden elements containing focusable content (WCAG 2.0 A 1.3.1).

Who filed this lawsuit, and which law firm?

Raymond T. Mahlberg filed this lawsuit, represented by the law firm Acacia Barros, P.

What legal risk does this create?

This case demonstrates the legal exposure for businesses with websites that are not accessible to disabled users, potentially leading to lawsuits seeking injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and court costs under ADA Title III.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: An Online Footwear Retail.... 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