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 high-end skincare and makeup retailer

Case # · District Court, S.D. Florida · Filed April 9, 2024

Plaintiff's Firm: RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A.

WCAG 2.1 A 1.3.2WCAG 2.1 A 2.4.3WCAG 2.1 A 3.3.2WCAG 2.1 A 4.1.2WCAG 2.1 AA 1.4.5

Case Summary

Plaintiff Oscar Herrera has filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida, on April 9, 2024, against an online high-end skincare and makeup retailer. The complaint, filed by RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A. (with co-counsel LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO DURAN, P.A.), alleges that the defendant's e-commerce website is not fully accessible to individuals with visual disabilities, violating Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The lawsuit details multiple Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 Level A and AA violations. These include issues with Meaningful Sequence (Guideline 1.3.2, focus shifting to unlabeled images, unlabeled items), Focus Order (Guideline 2.4.3, dialog box not announced, focus not shifting), Labels or Instructions (Guideline 3.3.2, unlabeled "Phone" button announced as "link end banner"), Name, Role, Value (Guideline 4.1.2, inability to complete forms due to focus issues), and Images of Text (Guideline 1.4.5, lack of announcements for product names in images). The plaintiff, a blind screen reader user, also encountered an inaccessible "accessibility" statement on the site.

This legal action highlights the ongoing risk for businesses that operate e-commerce websites and physical stores, emphasizing the critical need for digital platforms to comply with ADA Title III requirements. Companies offering goods, services, and privileges online that link to brick-and-mortar operations must ensure full and equal access for all, including those with visual impairments, to avoid claims of discrimination and potential litigation.

Case Q&A

What specific WCAG violations is this online high-end skincare and makeup retailer accused of?

The complaint alleges violations including WCAG 2.1 A Guideline 1.3.2 (Meaningful Sequence), WCAG 2.1 A Guideline 2.4.3 (Focus Order), WCAG 2.1 A Guideline 3.3.2 (Labels or Instructions), WCAG 2.1 A Guideline 4.1.2 (Name, Role, Value), and WCAG 2.1 AA Guideline 1.4.5 (Images of Text), which prevent effective screen reader use.

Who filed this lawsuit, and which law firm?

This lawsuit was filed by Oscar Herrera, represented by RODERICK V. HANNAH, ES

, P.

, with co-counsel LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO DURAN, P.

What legal risk does this create for similar businesses?

This lawsuit underscores the legal risk for businesses operating websites linked to physical public accommodations under ADA Title III. Failure to provide accessible digital platforms can lead to claims of discrimination, requiring injunctive relief, policy changes, and potential legal fees to ensure equal access for individuals with disabilities.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: an online high-end skinca.... 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