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 Infant and Toddler Product Retailer

Case #NY-74661819 · District Court, S.D. New York · Filed August 18, 2026

Plaintiff's Firm: GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC

WCAG 2.0 AAMissing Alt TextEmpty LinksRedundant LinksDuplicate Page Titles

Case Summary

Plaintiff Washington Benavides Moran initiated a legal action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on August 18, 2026, alleging that an online retailer specializing in infant and toddler products maintained a website inaccessible to visually impaired users. Represented by Gottlieb & Associates PLLC, Mr. Moran's complaint asserts claims under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, New York State Human Rights Law, and New York City Human Rights Law, seeking to remedy widespread digital barriers encountered by himself and other individuals similarly situated.

The complaint specifically details several critical accessibility failures on the defendant's digital platform. Key among these are the absence of alternative text for graphical images, making visual content incomprehensible to screen readers, and the presence of empty links that lack descriptive text, leading to user confusion and navigation difficulties. Furthermore, the website featured redundant links, which forced keyboard and screen-reader users through unnecessary repetitions, and failed to provide alternative text for images within links, leaving the function of these interactive elements ambiguous. The platform also suffered from identical title elements across multiple pages, preventing screen readers from distinguishing between them, and a host of broken links that, when encountered, offered no clear feedback to the visually impaired user, hindering their ability to return to previous searches. These shortcomings collectively rendered the online shopping experience unequal for blind and visually-impaired consumers.

This case underscores the ongoing legal challenges faced by digital businesses that do not prioritize inclusive design. Companies operating online platforms must recognize the imperative of digital accessibility, as a failure to comply with established guidelines like WCAG 2.0 can expose them to significant litigation risk under federal and state disability laws. The precedent set by such lawsuits emphasizes that merely having an online presence is insufficient; the platform must be fully and independently usable by all potential customers, including those with visual impairments. Businesses that delay in auditing their digital properties and implementing comprehensive accessibility policies risk not only legal repercussions but also alienating a substantial demographic of potential consumers.

Case Q&A

What specific web accessibility issues did the plaintiff encounter?

The plaintiff encountered several barriers, including a lack of alternative text for images and linked images, empty links without descriptive text, redundant links, pages with identical title elements, and broken links that failed to inform screen-reader users of their status.

Who is the plaintiff, and which law firm represents them in this action?

The plaintiff is Washington Benavides Moran, represented by Gottlieb & Associates PLLC.

What is the broader implication of this lawsuit for online businesses?

This lawsuit highlights the legal necessity for online businesses to ensure their digital platforms are fully accessible to individuals with disabilities, or face potential ADA Title III litigation and the associated costs and injunctions.

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

AI · Powered by TDARI database + Gemini

Online

TDARI Legal Intel Assistant

I'm analyzing ADA Website Accessibility Lawsuit: an Infant and Toddler Pro.... 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