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 Beauty Service Provider

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed October 18, 2022

Plaintiff's Firm: J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC.

WCAG 2.1 AAKeyboard Navigation FailureScreen Reader IncompatibilityMissing Labels and Semantic MarkupADA Title III Website

Case Summary

WINDY LUCIUS filed a federal lawsuit against a hair salon business in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on October 18, 2022. The complaint alleges that the defendant's mobile website is not fully accessible to visually impaired consumers, thereby violating Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The lawsuit specifically details several WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA guideline violations. These include failures in "Guideline 2.4.3 - Focus order," where content such as service prices is displayed but not announced, leading to incorrect information being conveyed to screen reader users. Additionally, "Guideline 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value" is violated due to incorrectly labeled elements, like a "Back to Top button" announced without a label, and an unlabeled main menu icon, causing confusion for assistive technology. "Guideline 2.4.5 – Multiple Ways" is also cited, as crucial navigation elements like menu links and the search feature within the main menu icon are unlabeled, making it difficult to find pages.

This legal action highlights the ongoing necessity for all online businesses, particularly those offering services and products through a website, to ensure their digital platforms are fully compliant with ADA Title III and WCAG standards. Businesses that fail to address issues such as logical focus order, proper element labeling, and accessible navigation risk similar lawsuits and potential injunctions to mandate corrective accessibility measures.

Case Q&A

What specific WCAG violations is this online beauty service provider accused of?

The online beauty service provider is accused of violating WCAG 2.1 Guidelines for Focus Order (2.4.3), Name, Role, Value (4.1.2), and Multiple Ways (2.4.5).

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 similar businesses of facing ADA Title III lawsuits, potential injunctions, and orders to pay attorney's fees if their websites are not fully accessible to individuals with disabilities, especially regarding screen reader compatibility and navigation.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: An Online Beauty Service .... 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