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 Entertainment Complex

Case #FLMD-68160916 · District Court, M.D. Florida · Filed January 15, 2024

Plaintiff's Firm: ZEIG LAW FIRM, LLC

Missing Alt TextKeyboard Navigation IssuesUnclear Labels for Interactive ElementsInaccessible FormsBroken Links

Case Summary

Shawn Gettinger, a legally blind resident of Manatee County, Florida, has initiated a federal lawsuit against an entertainment complex, alleging that its website fails to meet digital accessibility standards under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Filed on January 15, 2024, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, the complaint outlines how the plaintiff encountered significant barriers that prevented him from fully accessing the online content and services provided by the defendant. The core of the claim asserts that these deficiencies deny visually impaired individuals the equal access guaranteed by federal law.

The complaint specifically enumerates numerous accessibility deficiencies, citing a lack of compatibility with screen-reading software. Key among the alleged violations are the absence of text equivalents for non-text elements (missing alt-text), unannounced pop-ups, and unclear labels for interactive components. Further, the digital platform purportedly features hidden elements on web pages, incorrectly formatted lists, and requires certain interactions to be performed exclusively with a mouse, thereby hindering keyboard navigation. Other stated issues include inadequate identification and navigation through title frames, forms lacking equivalent information for sighted and blind users, and broken links, all contributing to a profoundly inaccessible user experience.

This legal action underscores the pervasive legal exposure faced by businesses operating digital platforms that neglect to integrate accessibility features. Companies across various sectors must recognize that their websites, applications, and other online services constitute public accommodations, necessitating full usability for individuals with disabilities. Failing to proactively adhere to established guidelines, such as WCAG 2.1, risks not only class action litigation but also reputational damage and the alienation of a significant segment of potential customers. The imperative for digital inclusivity is clear, demanding comprehensive policy and technical adjustments to ensure equitable online access for all.

Case Q&A

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

The plaintiff encountered numerous barriers, including missing alt-text for images, unclear labels for interactive elements, and unannounced pop-ups. The website also reportedly required mouse-only interactions for certain functions, lacked proper keyboard operability, contained incorrectly formatted lists, and featured broken links, making navigation and content access profoundly difficult for a screen-reader user.

Who is bringing this lawsuit and which law firm represents them?

The lawsuit is being brought by Shawn Gettinger, a visually impaired individual. He is represented in this action by ZEIG LAW FIRM, LLC.

What broader implications does this type of lawsuit hold for businesses with online presences?

This case highlights the critical need for all businesses to ensure their digital platforms are fully accessible to individuals with disabilities, in compliance with ADA Title III. Organizations risk legal action and alienating customers if their websites or applications fail to meet established accessibility guidelines, such as WCAG 2.1, making proactive compliance essential for all online enterprises.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: an Entertainment Complex. 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