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: a haircare product retailer

Case #NY-69664263 · District Court, S.D. New York · Filed February 21, 2025

Plaintiff's Firm: GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC

Missing Alt TextEmpty Link TextRedundant LinksDuplicate Page TitlesKeyboard Focus Not Visible

Case Summary

Mykayla Fagnani, a visually-impaired individual, initiated a federal lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on February 21, 2025. Her complaint targets an online haircare product retailer, alleging significant barriers that prevent equal access to its digital platform for blind and low-vision users. This action seeks to enforce digital accessibility standards under federal and state anti-discrimination laws.

The plaintiff's filing details several precise Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) violations experienced on the digital storefront. These include the lack of alternative text (alt-text) for graphical images, which renders visual content indecipherable to screen readers. Additionally, the platform featured empty links devoid of descriptive text, causing confusion for keyboard and screen-reader navigation. Redundant links leading to the same URL created unnecessary repetition, while linked images missing alt-text further hindered the understanding of interactive elements and embedded PDF information. Furthermore, multiple pages shared identical title elements, impeding the distinction between different sections, and broken links often redirected users to error pages without proper screen-reader notification, preventing effective navigation.

The allegations within this complaint underscore the critical imperative for e-commerce businesses to proactively ensure their digital storefronts are fully compliant with accessibility mandates. Companies operating interactive websites, particularly those offering consumer goods and services, face substantial legal exposure under ADA Title III if their platforms remain inaccessible to individuals with disabilities. This case highlights how pervasive digital barriers not only disadvantage visually-impaired consumers by denying access to essential information and transactional capabilities but also create significant litigation risk for any entity failing to integrate robust accessibility measures into its online operations, thereby increasing the likelihood of similar legal challenges and potential injunctive relief.

Case Q&A

What specific deficiencies did the plaintiff encounter when trying to access the online platform?

The plaintiff encountered several critical accessibility barriers, including missing alternative text for images and captcha prompts, empty links without descriptive text, redundant links leading to identical destinations, linked images lacking alt-text, duplicate page titles, and broken links that failed to communicate their status to screen readers.

Who filed this lawsuit and which legal team is representing them?

Mykayla Fagnani, a visually-impaired individual, is the plaintiff in this action, represented by the law firm GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC.

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

This litigation highlights the ongoing legal obligation for online businesses to ensure their digital services are accessible to all, particularly under ADA Title III. Companies failing to implement WCAG standards risk similar lawsuits, potential injunctive orders mandating extensive website modifications, and reputational damage for discriminatory practices.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: a haircare product retail.... 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