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 Footwear and Accessories Retailer

Case #FLMD-16877623 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Filed February 21, 2020

Plaintiff's Firm: RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A., LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO DURAN, P.A.

WCAG 2.0 AAMissing LabelsScreen Reader IncompatibilityEmpty LinksMissing Link Text

Case Summary

WANDA KOEHN, a visually disabled individual, initiated legal proceedings against an online footwear and accessories retailer in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida on February 21, 2020. Represented by RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A. and LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO DURAN, P.A., Ms. Koehn asserts that the retail entity's digital platform fails to comply with the accessibility mandates of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The complaint highlights her inability to effectively access and utilize the website due to significant barriers, impeding her capacity to browse merchandise, locate physical stores, and engage with promotional content.

The lawsuit specifically enumerates multiple digital accessibility deficiencies, including critical issues such as menu drop-down options lacking proper labels for screen reader integration, the presence of empty and unlabeled links, and content presentation methods that result in information loss for visually impaired users. Furthermore, the complaint points out the absence of necessary prompting cues and assistive accommodations for completing online forms, along with a complete lack of an explicit accessibility notice, statement, or policy on the website. These failures collectively render the platform non-compliant with recognized web accessibility standards, specifically Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA, thereby preventing equitable access.

This particular action underscores the persistent legal vulnerabilities for businesses operating online platforms that are considered extensions of physical public accommodations. Companies within the retail sector, especially those utilizing websites for store information, merchandise sales, and customer engagement, face a heightened imperative to ensure their digital interfaces are fully accessible to individuals with disabilities. A failure to proactively address these systemic access barriers can lead to similar litigation, mandating costly injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and comprehensive overhauls to achieve ADA compliance, emphasizing the ongoing necessity for inclusive digital design across all industries.

Case Q&A

What specific accessibility challenges did the plaintiff encounter on the website?

The plaintiff experienced difficulties due to unlabelled menu drop-down options, empty and unlabelled links, and content loss when using a screen reader. The website also lacked essential prompting information for online forms and an accessibility policy.

Who is representing the visually disabled plaintiff in this ADA complaint?

WANDA KOEHN is being represented by RODERICK V. HANNAH, ES

, P.

and LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO DURAN, P.

What broader implications does this lawsuit hold for other businesses with an online presence?

This case serves as a crucial reminder for all businesses with digital platforms linked to physical accommodations that they must ensure comprehensive accessibility. Neglecting to meet ADA Title III requirements for web access exposes them to legal challenges, potential injunctive orders, and the obligation to cover attorney's fees.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: An Online Footwear and Ac.... 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