Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC
green gradient background, "The Future of Application Security Is Already Here." and a read the report button.

TENZER-FUCHS v. JOSEPH ENTERPRISES, INC.

Filed December 28, 2020

Plaintiff

  • Name: Michelle Tenzer-Fuchs
  • Filing date: December 28, 2020
  • State of filing: New York

Defendant

  • Name: Joseph Enterprises, Inc.
  • Website: www.chia.com
  • Industry: Consumer Goods
  • Summary: Joseph Enterprises, Inc. manufactures and sells a wide variety of Chia Pet plants and related accessories.

Case Summary

On December 28, 2020, Michelle Tenzer-Fuchs filed a Complaint in New York Federal court against Joseph Enterprises, Inc.. Plaintiff Michelle Tenzer-Fuchs alleges that www.chia.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.1 accessibility standard(s).

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

  • The issues started on the homepage of the site where Plaintiff immediately found that she was unable to figure out how to navigate to other pages because her reader could not read the page options to her beyond the first option listed. For example, her NVDA reader was able to read the “Featured Characters” page option, but when she opened the Featured Characters page, she found that none of the character names listed were readable to her screen-reader, unless she actually selected the name of the character, which was problematic for Plaintiff because each time she clicked on a name, she was immediately
    redirected to pages that she didn’t want to go to.
  • Even further in the site, Plaintiff quickly found that many features on the Website lacks alt-
    text, which is the invisible code embedded beneath a graphical image. As a result, Plaintiff was unable to differentiate what Chia Pets were on the screen due to the failure of the Website to adequately describe its content.
  • Additionally, Plaintiff found that in the rare instance that her NVDA reader would actually speak to her about an image on the screen, the reader would just repeatedly say “Load image into gallery viewer.” This was very unhelpful and very frustrating to Plaintiff, who just wanted to hear a description of what kind of Chia Pet the image on her screen depicted.

  • 33. Many features on the Website also fail to add a label element or title attribute for each field. This is a problem for the visually-impaired because the screen reader fails to communicate the purpose of the page element. It also leads to the user not being able to understand what she or she is expected to insert into the subject field. This was an issue on Defendant’s Website particularly when she got to a product page for a Chia Pet because her reader could not tell her how to add the Chia Pet to her cart or checkout. As a result, Plaintiff and similarly situated visually-impaired users of Defendant’s Website are unable to enjoy the privileges and benefits of the Website equally to sighted users.
  • The Website also contained a host of broken links, which is a hyperlink to a non-existent or empty webpage. For the visually-impaired this is especially paralyzing due to the inability to navigate or otherwise determine where one is on the website once a broken link is encountered. For example, upon coming across a link of interest, Plaintiff was redirected to an error page. However, the screen-reader failed to communicate that the link was broken. As a result, Plaintiff could not get back to her original search.
  • Plaintiff has made multiple attempts to complete a purchase on www.chia.com, most recently in December of 2020, but was unable to do so independently because of the many access barriers on Defendant’s website. These access barriers have caused www.chia.com to be inaccessible to, and not independently usable by, blind and visually-impaired persons.

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 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. Exec. Law § 296(2) 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 her 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 State and New York City Human Rights Law
  • Pre- and post-judgment interest
  • An award of costs and expenses of this action together with reasonable attorneys’ and expert fees
  • Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

New YorkConsumer Goods

Promotional banner highlighting failures found in PCI audits and how to spot the gaps