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 Skincare Retailer

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed September 30, 2022

Plaintiff's Firm: ACACIA BARROS, P.A.

WCAG 2.1 AADuplicate IDMissing Alt TextScreen Reader IncompatibilityFocus Order IssuesADA Title III Website

Case Summary

Plaintiff Aishia Petersen, represented by Acacia Barros, P.A., has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, on September 30, 2022. The complaint alleges that an online skincare retailer's website is not fully and equally accessible to visually impaired consumers, thereby violating Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

The complaint specifies several accessibility barriers on the e-commerce website, including duplicate IDs where the same label is used on multiple images, images lacking alt-text descriptions (with screen readers announcing HTTP links instead), and product pages where item prices and descriptions do not receive focus and are not announced. Additionally, product images are generically announced as "slide," "next slide," or "previous Slide" rather than with descriptive IDs, and a "pickup at a nearby store today" feature displays addresses but fails to announce them via screen readers.

This legal action underscores the significant risk faced by businesses operating digital platforms that fail to comply with ADA Title III and WCAG guidelines. Companies offering goods and services online must ensure their websites are fully compatible with screen-reading software and other assistive technologies to prevent similar lawsuits and guarantee equitable access for all disabled users, especially those with visual impairments.

Case Q&A

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

The online skincare retailer is accused of duplicate IDs for images, missing alt-text descriptions, product prices and descriptions lacking proper focus and announcement, generic announcement of product images, and a store pickup feature that fails to announce addresses via screen readers.

Who filed this lawsuit, and which law firm?

Aishia Petersen filed this lawsuit, represented by the law firm Acacia Barros, P.

What legal risk does this create?

This creates a legal risk for businesses with e-commerce websites that do not meet ADA Title III accessibility standards, particularly for visually impaired users, potentially leading to lawsuits and the necessity of extensive website modifications.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: a Skincare 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