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 electronics retailer

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed May 24, 2023

Plaintiff's Firm: Mendez Law Offices, PLLC, Adams & Associates, P.A.

WCAG 2.1 AWCAG 2.1 AAKeyboard Navigation FailureMissing Form LabelsFocus Order IssuesADA Title III Website

Case Summary

ALEJANDRO ESPINOZA filed a federal lawsuit in the United States District Court Southern District of Florida on May 24, 2023, against an online electronics retailer, alleging that its website is not accessible to visually impaired individuals, thus violating Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The complaint details several specific WCAG 2.1 violations, including issues with keyboard operability (Standard 2.1.1 Level A) preventing users from adding products to a cart due to non-operable fields for model, processor, and extended warranty options. Additionally, the lawsuit cites a lack of proper labels for input fields (Standard 3.3.2 Level A), invisible keyboard focus indicators (Standard 2.4.7 Level AA), and a non-sequential focus order on the add-ons page (Standard 2.4.3 Level A), all of which hinder effective navigation by screen reader software.

This legal action highlights the ongoing necessity for businesses operating e-commerce websites to ensure digital accessibility. Failure to comply with established web accessibility guidelines, such as WCAG, can result in lawsuits seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages, posing significant legal and reputational risks for similar online retailers who do not provide equal access to their digital platforms for users with disabilities.

Case Q&A

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

The online electronics retailer is accused of WCAG 2.1 Standard 2.1.1 (Keyboard) violations for non-operable fields (Model, Processor, Extended Warranty, Skip Addons), Standard 3.3.2 (Labels or Instructions) for missing quantity input field labels, Standard 2.4.7 (Focus Visible) for invisible keyboard focus indicators, and Standard 2.4.3 (Focus Order) for non-sequential navigation on the add-ons page.

Who filed this lawsuit, and which law firm?

ALEJANDRO ESPINOZA filed this lawsuit, represented by Mendez Law Offices, PLLC and Adams & Associates, P.

What legal risk does this create?

This lawsuit demonstrates the legal risk for online businesses that fail to provide accessible websites for individuals with disabilities, potentially leading to federal litigation, demands for injunctive relief to remediate accessibility barriers, and claims for damages under the AD

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: an online electronics ret.... 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