California Companies Likely to See More ADA Website Accessibility Suits in 2019
A new analysis report predicts a surge in federal ADA website accessibility lawsuits could hit California companies in 2019. The Ninth Circuit ruled Domino's website was bound to the ADA last month, making California's federal courts more attractive to plaintiffs.
February 06, 2019 at 07:34 PM
3 minute read
Only 10 website accessibility lawsuits were filed in California's federal courts last year, according to a new report—but that number could rise in 2019, lawyers said.
A U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruling last month found Domino's Pizza Inc.'s website must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, reversing a lower court's decision. Kristina Launey, a labor and employment attorney at Seyfarth Shaw in Sacramento, said the ruling could make California's federal courts a more attractive destination for website accessibility lawsuits. She co-authored the recently released analysis report of ADA lawsuit trends.
“The state courts were seeming more friendly to plaintiffs but, obviously, with now a Ninth Circuit opinion saying the ADA does apply to websites and mobile applications and having other language in the opinion rejecting due process and primary jurisdiction arguments, we do expect that we'll probably see an increase in website accessibility lawsuits in federal court again in California,” Launey said.
Martin Orlick, a San Francisco-based partner at Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell, and David Raizman, the Los Angeles-based co-chair of Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart's disability access and Title III practice group, both also said the Domino's ruling is likely to up the number of website accessibility suits filed in California federal court.
The lawyers said there's been a nationwide rise in website accessibility lawsuits in recent years. Seyfarth Shaw's report found there were at least 2,258 such cases filed last year, a 177 percent increase from 814 such lawsuits in 2017.
There are some ways California in-house counsel can prevent a website accessibility suit.
“I think the only responsible thing to do, and frankly the correct thing to do from a business perspective, is to incorporate website accessibility into the design of your website,” Raizman said. “From a litigation perspective, to have a plan that you are comfortable that you can execute it and put it in writing. So that if it is not complete by the time you're sued, at least you can point to it and say you are on track or ahead of schedule in completing this plan and we do not require the court's intervention.”
He and Orlick said companies should aim to comply with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, the international best practice standard. The guidelines include providing text alternative for non-text content, such as photos, and creating alternative ways for content to be communicated.
Launey said it's also important for support staff to be trained on accessibility issues.
“Someone calls and says, 'Your website isn't working with JAWS [a screen reader].' And the customer service agent says, 'What's JAWS?' Little things like that,” Launey said. “Not knowing the terminology or the right questions to ask can really have a detrimental effect and might cause someone to go seek out a lawyer that they might not otherwise.”
Read More:
Domino's Fall: 9th Circuit Decision Gives ADA Suits New Steam
A 'Tsunami' of Website Accessibility Cases Means Compliance Challenges for Companies
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Marsh McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
Aggressive FTC May Force Merging Companies to Bolster Legal Defenses
4 minute readBest Legal Departments: How Blackstone's Legal and Compliance Team Got the All-Clear to Grow Business
CEOs Want Data-Based Risk Management; GCs Lack the Tech to Do So.
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250