MARTINEZ, JR. v. KELLOGG COMPANY

• Missing alternative text which presents a problem because an image without alternative text results in an empty link. Alternative Text is invisible code embedded beneath a graphical image on a website. Web accessibility requires that Alternative Text be coded with each picture so that a screen reader can speak the Alternative Text where a sighted user sees pictures. Alternative Text does not change the visual presentation, but instead generates a text box that will pop-up when the mouse moves over the
  picture. The lack of Alternative Text on these graphics prevents screen readers from accurately vocalizing a description of the graphics;
• Multiple form labels, which presents a problem because a form control has more than one label associated with it. A form control should have at most one associated label element. If more than one label element is associated to the control, assistive technology may not read the appropriate label; (3) Empty headings, which present a problem because a heading contains no content. Keyboard and screen reader users often navigate by heading elements. An empty heading will present no information and may introduce confusion;
• Empty buttons, which present a problem because a button is empty or has no value text. When navigating to a button, descriptive text must be presented to screen reader users to indicate the function of the button; and
• Empty links which present a problem because a link contains no text. If a link contains no text, the function or purpose of the link will not be presented to the user. This can introduce confusion for keyboard and screen reader users. 

Violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq.

• A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, et seq., and N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York;
• A preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Defendant to take all the steps necessary to make its App into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that the App is readily accessible to and usable by blind individuals;
• A declaration that Defendant owns, maintains and/or operates its App in a manner which discriminates against the blind and which fails to provide access for persons with disabilities as required by Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, et seq., and N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York;
• An order directing Defendants to continually update and maintain its App to ensure that it remains fully accessible to and usable by the visually-impaired;
• Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory damages and fines, to Plaintiff for violations of their civil rights under New York State Human Rights Law and City Law;
• Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs of suit as provided by state and federal law;
• For pre- and post-judgment interest to the extent permitted by law; and
• For such other and further relief which this court deems just and proper.