LAURIDSEN v. AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING, INC.

    Plaintiff

    • Name: Erin Lauridsen
    • Filing date: September 16, 2020
    • State of filing: California

    Defendant

    • Name: Automatic Data Processing, Inc.
    • Website: www.adp.com
    • Industry: Commercial Services & Supplies
    • Summary: Automatic Data Processing, Inc., commonly referred to as ADP, provides payroll, accounting, human resources, and related services to businesses.

    Case Summary

    On September 16, 2020, Erin Lauridsen filed a Complaint in California State court against Automatic Data Processing, Inc. . Plaintiff Erin Lauridsen alleges that www.adp.com is not accessible.

    Case Details

    Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

    • links do not work;
    • screen reader users have difficulty submitting responses  through the website;
    • elements, such as edit fields, graphic links, and drop-down menus are not labeled, inappropriately labeled, or otherwise difficult to interact with for screen reader users;
    • inconsistent organization makes navigating the site and app unreasonably time-consuming for screen reader users;
    • menus are inaccessible such that a screen reader cannot navigate or select items within them;
    • pop-up messages are not spoken by screen readers;
    • and the color scheme and font make it difficult for people with low vision to navigate the app and the website. 

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

    • California Civil Code § 51 (Unruh Civil Rights Act) 
    • California Civil Code § 51.5 
    • California Unfair Competition Law

    Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

    • For an order finding and declaring that ADP’s acts and practices as set forth herein are unlawful and unfair;
    • For an order requiring that ADP comply with state law and provide full and equal independent access to its website and mobile application for people who are blind and have low
      vision and/or who use screen reader technology;
    • For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper to ensure that LightHouse employees who are blind or have low vision are able to use ADP’s products and
      services on a basis that is full and equal to that which is available to sighted individuals;
    • For an award of restitution pursuant to California Business and Professions code section 17203 in the amount of the difference between what LightHouse paid for ADP’s product
      and the value it actually obtained;
    • For an award of attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses incurred in the filing and prosecution of this action; and
    • For an award of compensatory damages for violations of California Civil Code, Sections 51 and 51.5 in an amount to be determined at trial. 

    Comments