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 Skincare Retailer

Case #NY-71232906 · District Court, S.D. New York · Filed August 29, 2025

Plaintiff's Firm: GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC

Missing Alt TextKeyboard Navigation IssuesScreen Reader IncompatibilityPage Title & Link PurposeInaccessible Forms

Case Summary

Visually-impaired plaintiff Cedric Bishop, on behalf of himself and a proposed class of individuals, has initiated legal proceedings against an online skincare retailer. The complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on August 29, 2025, alleges that the defendant's interactive website fails to provide equal access to blind and visually-impaired persons, thereby violating Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), along with New York State and City human rights laws.

The lawsuit asserts that the retailer's digital platform exhibits numerous accessibility barriers, which impede independent use by individuals relying on screen-reading software. Specific deficiencies include an absence of alternative text for non-text elements and linked images, leading to screen reader incompatibility. Additionally, the complaint highlights problematic empty links, redundant links, and web pages with identical or missing title elements, making navigation confusing or impossible. Further allegations detail issues with forms lacking equivalent information for sighted users, content where structure is not programmatically conveyed, and a lack of discernible keyboard focus indicators, among other WCAG 2.0 non-compliance points.

This action by Gottlieb & Associates PLLC underscores the critical need for all businesses operating online to ensure their digital properties are fully accessible. The case illustrates the ongoing legal exposure for entities whose websites do not meet established accessibility guidelines, potentially leading to injunctions, compensatory, punitive, and treble damages, and significant legal fees. Such a lawsuit serves as a reminder to companies in various industries that neglecting web accessibility can result in considerable legal and financial repercussions, beyond simply rectifying technical flaws.

Case Q&A

What specific digital accessibility issues were identified on the online retailer's platform?

The complaint details several accessibility issues, including a lack of alternative text for images and non-text elements, the presence of empty and redundant links, identical or missing page titles, inaccessible forms, and an overall incompatibility with screen-reading software.

Who is representing the visually-impaired plaintiff in this legal action?

The visually-impaired plaintiff, Cedric Bishop, is being represented by the law firm Gottlieb & Associates PLLC.

What broader legal implications does this complaint highlight for online businesses?

This complaint emphasizes the ongoing legal necessity for online businesses to maintain accessible websites under ADA Title III and related state laws, warning of potential injunctions, significant damages, and legal costs if digital platforms fail to meet accessibility standards like WCAG 2.0.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: An Online Skincare 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