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: Modern Asian Bistro

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed September 29, 2023

Plaintiff's Firm: J. Courtney Cunningham, PLLC

WCAG 2.1 AAFocus Order ViolationError Identification FailureMissing Labels and InstructionsImages of Text Without Text Alternative

Case Summary

Windy Lucius has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, on September 29, 2023, against the operator of a modern Asian bistro. The plaintiff 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 complaint specifically details several WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA violations. These include a focus order violation (Guideline 2.4.3) where screen reader users cannot select or change dates in the reservation popup, an error identification failure (Guideline 3.3.1) where users are not informed which field has an error, missing labels or instructions (Guideline 3.3.2) for logo images leading to unhelpful announcements, and an images of text violation (Guideline 1.4.5) where promotional content is an unlabeled image, rendering it inaccessible to screen readers.

This litigation highlights a significant legal risk for businesses, particularly those in the restaurant industry, that offer mobile websites or digital platforms integral to their services. Failure to ensure full accessibility for disabled individuals, especially visually impaired users relying on screen reader software, can lead to ADA Title III lawsuits, demanding injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and the overhaul of inaccessible digital interfaces.

Case Q&A

What specific WCAG violations is this restaurant accused of?

The restaurant is accused of WCAG 2.1 Level A and AA violations including focus order issues (Guideline 2.4.3), error identification failures (Guideline 3.3.1), missing labels or instructions on images (Guideline 3.3.2), and using images of text without alternatives (Guideline 1.4.5), which prevent screen reader software from properly interpreting content.

Who filed this lawsuit, and which law firm?

Windy Lucius filed this lawsuit and is represented by J. Courtney Cunningham, PLLC.

What legal risk does this create?

This creates a legal risk for businesses operating digital platforms, such as mobile websites, that are integral to their public accommodations, as they must comply with ADA Title III and ensure their platforms are accessible to individuals with disabilities, or face litigation for discrimination and denial of equal access.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: Modern Asian Bistro. 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