Plaintiff
- Name: Karen Blachowicz
- Filing date: March 13, 2019
- State of filing: New York
Defendant
- Name: Minted, LLC
- Website: www.minted.com
- Industry: Consumer Goods
- Summary: Minted is an online marketplace of independent artists and designers. It offers wedding supplies, holiday supplies, baby & kid supplies, and art & print designs.
Case Summary
On March 13, 2019, Karen Blachowicz filed a Complaint in New York Federal court against Minted, LLC. Plaintiff Karen Blachowicz alleges that www.minted.com is not accessible.
Case Details
Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:
- Defendant’s website fails to provide a label and instruction in all field elements
- While Defendant’s website does include elements that have a visible focus, it cannot be seen because the outline is too similar to the background color
- Defendant’s website is not created in a way that they can be operated with
only a keyboard
Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:
- Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.
- Violation of New York State Human Rights Law, Exec. Law, Article 15 § 290, et seq.
- Violation of New York State Civil Rights Law, NY CLS Civ R, Article 4 (CLS Civ R § 40, 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
