BEGG v. CALIFORNIA GRAND CASINO

Plaintiff

Name: Bruce Begg
Filing date: June 25, 2020
State of filing: California

Defendant

Name: California Grand Casino
Website: www.californiagrandcasino.com
Industry: Entertainment
Summary: California Grand Casino is a casino and entertainment complex in Pacheo, California offering Texas Hold’em Poker, Omaha Poker, Poker Tournaments, Blackjack, Pai Gow Poker and EZ Baccarat, as well as a number of restaurants and bars.

Case Summary

On June 25, 2020, Bruce Begg filed a Complaint in California Federal court against California Grand Casino. Plaintiff Bruce Begg alleges that www.californiagrandcasino.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.1 accessibility standard(s).

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

Many features on the Website lacks alt. text
Many features on the Website also fail to Add a label element or title attribute for each field.
Many pages on the Website also contain the same title elements.
The Website does not provide a text equivalent for every non-text element;
The purpose of each link cannot be determined from the link text alone or from the link text and its programmatically determined link context;
Web pages lack titles that describe their topic or purpose;
Headings and labels do not describe topic or purpose;
Keyboard user interfaces lack a mode of operation where the keyboard focus indicator is visible;
The default human language of each web page cannot be programmatically determined;
The human language of each passage or phrase in the content cannot be programmatically determined;
Labels or instructions are not always provided when content requires user input;
Text cannot be resized up to 200 percent without assistive technology so that it may still be viewed without loss of content or functionality;
A mechanism is not always available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple web pages;
A correct reading sequence is not provided on pages where the sequence in which content is presented affects its meaning;
In content implemented using markup languages, elements do not always have complete start and end tags, are not nested according to their specifications, may contain duplicate attributes, and IDs are not always unique; and
The name and role of all UI elements cannot be programmatically determined; things that can be set by the user cannot be programmatically set; and/or notification of changes to these items is not available to user agents, including assistive technology.

Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:

Violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.
Violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq.
Declaratory Relief

Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

A Declaratory Judgment that at the commencement of this action California Grand. was in violation of the specific requirements of Title III of the ADA described above, and the relevant implementing regulations of the ADA, in that California Grand took no action that was reasonably calculated to ensure that its Website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with visual disabilities;
A preliminary and permanent injunction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a)(1) and (2) and section 52.1 of the California Civil Code enjoining Defendant from violating the Unruh Civil Rights Act and ADA and requiring Defendant to take the steps necessary to make the website readily accessible to and usable by visually-impaired individuals; An award of costs and expenses of this action;
An award of statutory minimum damages of $4,000 per offense per person pursuant to section 52(a) of the California Civil Code.
For attorneys’ fees and expenses pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 52(a), 52.1(h), and 42 U.S.C. § 12205; An order certifying the Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) & (b)(2) and/or (b)(3), appointing Plaintiff as Class Representative, and his attorneys as Class Counsel; and
Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.