SLADE v. DYLN, INC

    Plaintiff

    • Name: Linda Slade
    • Filing date: March 5, 2021
    • State of filing: New York

    Defendant

    • Name: Dyln Inc.
    • Website: www.dyln.co
    • Industry: Consumer Goods
    • Summary: Dyln manufactures and sells water bottles with built-in magnesium VitaBead diffusers.

    Case Summary

    On March 5, 2021, Linda Slade filed a Complaint in New York Federal court against Dyln Inc.. Plaintiff Linda Slade alleges that www.dyln.co is not accessible per the WCAG 2.1, Section 508 accessibility standard(s).

    Case Details

    Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

    • Plaintiff found the Website hard to navigate because the focus order skips randomly from menu items to page content.
    • Only the first color button is in the Tab order – users cannot hear the other options unless they switch to Arrow key navigation.
    • Each color button is automatically selected and announced as such “selected.” This is a failure of the “On Focus” guideline. Buttons should not be selected when they receive focus. The actual color is not announced.
    • Choose Size” label was not announced but the options are announced with the Tab key.
    • Quantity field label is not announced.
    • Unable to add any accessories. Ex. Attempted to add the “Wide Mouth Sports Cap with Straw” and this does cause a pop-up to be displayed. Users must click the “yes, add to cart” button in this pop-up before the item is added, but the pop-up’s not announced and doesn’t receive focus.
    • Similarly, on Dyln.co, blind customers are not aware if the desired products, such as bottles, have been added to the shopping cart because the screen-reader does not indicate the type of product. Moreover, blind customers are unable to select the color of the product they desire. Therefore, blind customers are essentially prevented from purchasing any items on Dyln.co.
    • Furthermore, Dyln.co lacks accessible image maps. An image map is a function that combines multiple words and links into one single image. Visual details on this single image highlight different “hot spots” which, when clicked on, allow the user to jump to many different destinations within the website. For an image map to be accessible, it must contain alt-text for the various “hot spots.” The image maps on Dyln.co’s menu page do not contain adequate alt-text and are therefore inaccessible to Plaintiff and the other blind individuals attempting to make a purchase. When Plaintiff tried to access the menu link in order to make a purchase, she was unable to access it completely.
    • Furthermore, Plaintiff is unable to locate the shopping cart because the shopping cart form does not specify the purpose of the shopping cart. As a result, blind customers are denied access to the shopping cart. Consequently, blind customers are unsuccessful in adding products into their shopping carts and are essentially prevented from purchasing items on Dyln.co.
    • Moreover, the lack of navigation links on Defendant’s website makes attempting to navigate through Dyln.co even more time consuming and confusing for Plaintiff and blind consumers.
    • Dyln.co requires the use of a mouse to complete a transaction. Yet, it is a fundamental tenet of web accessibility that for a web page to be accessible to Plaintiff and blind people, it must be possible for the user to interact with the page using only the keyboard. Indeed, Plaintiff and blind users cannot use a mouse because manipulating the mouse is a visual activity of moving the mouse pointer from one visual spot on the page to another. Thus, Dyln.co’s inaccessible design, which requires the use of a mouse to complete a transaction, denies Plaintiff and blind customers the ability to independently navigate and/or make purchases on Dyln.co.

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

    • Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. 
    • New York State Human Rights Law
    • New York City Human Rights Law
    • New York State Civil Rights Law
    • 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. Exec. Law § 296, et seq., and 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, Nakedpoppy.com, into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that
      mottandbow.com is readily accessible to and usable by blind individuals;
    • A declaration that Defendant owns, maintains and/or operates its website, mottandbow.com, in a manner which 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. Exec. Law § 296, et seq., and N.Y.C. Administrative Code § 8-107, et seq., and the laws of New York; 
    • An order certifying this case as a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) & (b)(2) and/or (b)(3), appointing Plaintiff as Class Representative, and her attorneys as Class Counsel;
    • An order directing Defendants to continually update and maintain its website to ensure that it remains fully accessible to and usable by the visually-impaired;
    • Compensatory damages in an amount to be determined by proof, including all applicable statutory damages and fines, to Plaintiff and the proposed class for violations of their civil
      rights under New York State Human Rights Law and City Law;
    • Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs of suit as provided by state and federal law;
    • For pre- and post-judgment interest to the extent permitted by law; and
    • For such other and further relief which this court deems just and proper. 

    Comments