ROMERO v. THE GOLF WAREHOUSE, LLC

    Plaintiff

    • Name: Josue Romero
    • Filing date: October 5, 2020
    • State of filing: New York

    Defendant

    • Name: The Golf Warehouse, LLC
    • Website: www.tgw.com
    • Industry: Leisure Products
    • Summary: The Golf Warehouse is an online reseller of golf apparel, equipment, supplies, and related accessories.

    Case Summary

    On October 5, 2020, Josue Romero filed a Complaint in New York Federal court against The Golf Warehouse, LLC. Plaintiff Josue Romero alleges that www.tgw.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.1 accessibility standard(s).

    Case Details

    Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

    • Lack of Alternative Text (“alt-text”), or a text equivalent. 
    • Empty Links That Contain No Text causing the function or purpose of the link to not be presented to the user. 
    • Redundant Links where adjacent links go to the same URL address which results in additional navigation and repetition for keyboard and screen-reader users
    • Linked Images Missing Alt-text, which causes problems if an image within a link contains no text and that image does not provide alt-text.
    • The company logo acts as a link designed to take the user from wherever they may be within the Defendant's website to the homepage of that site. For this website, the link is not properly labeled and where the link ("logo") will operate properly (taking the user back to the home page), the missing label prevents the user (visually impaired) to interpret the logo/link and in the case of using a screen reader, the screen reader software cannot properly interpret the logo/link effectively hiding the purpose of that link from the user.
    • Product pricing is not labeled properly to integrate with screen reader and misinterprets the information. For example, pricing for a gift card is read as seventy- five point zero zero. The description does not state the price as $75.00 (seventy-five dollars), therefore, overlooks important information that a customer would require to complete the purchase.
    • When using the keyboard for navigation the menu items are inaccessible. This bars the user from being able to review what products are in each category and bars the user from making a purchase.
    • The telephone number provided for customer service is inaccessible. The information is not labeled properly to integrate with the screen reader. This bars the user from contacting the company for assistance.

    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 NYSHRL
    • VIOLATIONS OF THE NEW YORK STATE CIVIL RIGHTS LAW
    • VIOLATIONS OF THE NYCHRL
    • DECLARATORY RELIEF

    Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

    • A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, et seq., 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 Website into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that the Website is readily accessible to and usable by blind individuals;
    • A declaration that Defendant owns, maintains and/or operates its
      Website in a manner that 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.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York
    • An order certifying the Class and Sub-Classes under Fed. R. Civ. P.
      23(a) & (b)(2) and/or (b)(3), appointing Plaintiff as Class Representative, and his attorneys as Class Counsel;
    • Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory and punitive damages and fines, to Plaintiff and the proposed class and subclasses for violations of their civil rights under New York City Human Rights Law and City Law;
    • Pre- and post-judgment interest;
    • An award of costs and expenses of this action together with
      reasonable attorneys’ and expert fees; and
    • Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper

    Comments