Plaintiff
- Name: Karen Blachowicz
- Filing date: June 25, 2020
- State of filing: New York
Defendant
- Name: Melissa & Doug, LLC
- Website: www.melissaanddoug.com
- Industry: Consumer Goods
- Summary: Melissa & Doug is an American toymaker manufacturing and selling retro, wooden toys, puzzles, and crafts at retail stores and via its website.
Case Summary
On June 25, 2020, Karen Blachowicz filed a Complaint in New York Federal court against Melissa & Doug, LLC. Plaintiff Karen Blachowicz alleges that www.melissaanddoug.com is not accessible.
Case Details
Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:
- Defendant’s Website is so constructed that the promotional code for 15% off is not accessible. Products in the “What Others Love This Month” carousel are announced by a screen reader with the exception of the promo code and discount amount. This leaves the screen reader user unable to access, or know about, the 15% off deal that the visual user is able to claim with ease.
- The contrast for the text on Defendant’s Website is not sufficient or in adherence to the requirements. The contrast between the white background and gray text is insufficient. The required minimum contrast ratio is 4.5:1 for regular text. The text below in gray has a ratio of 2:4:1.
Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:
- Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.
Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:
- A Declaratory Judgment that at the commencement of this action Defendant 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 Defendant 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 permanent injunction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a)(2), 28 CFR § 36.504(a), N.Y. Exec. Law § 296, et seq., and the laws of New York, which directs Defendant to take all steps necessary to bring its Website into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that its Website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, blind individuals, and which further directs that the Court shall retain jurisdiction for a period to be determined to ensure that Defendant has adopted and is following an institutional policy that will in fact cause it to remain fully in compliance with the law—the specific injunctive relief requested by Plaintiff is described more fully in paragraph 11 above.
- Payment of actual, statutory, and punitive damages, as the Court deems proper
- Payment of costs of suit
- Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory damages and fines, to Plaintiff for violations of her civil rights under New York State Human Rights Law
- Payment of reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205 and 28 CFR § 36.505, including costs of monitoring Defendant’s compliance with the judgment (see Access Now, Inc. v. Lax World, LLC, No. 1:17-cv-10976-DJC (D. Mass. Apr. 17, 2018) (ECF 11) (“Plaintiffs, as the prevailing party, may file a fee petition before the Court surrenders jurisdiction. Pursuant to Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens’ Council for Clean Air, 478 U.S. 546, 559 (1986), supplemented, 483 U.S. 711 (1987), and Garrity v. Sununu, 752 F.2d 727, 738-39 (1st Cir. 1984), the fee petition may include costs to monitor Defendant’s compliance with the permanent injunction.”); see also Gniewkowski v. Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-01898-AJS (W.D. Pa. Jan. 11, 2018) (ECF 191) (same)
- Whatever other relief the Court deems just, equitable and appropriate
- An Order retaining jurisdiction over this case until Defendant has complied with the Court’s Orders
