MUHAMMAD v. BARINGS LLC

    Plaintiff

    • Name: Rasul Muhammad
    • Filing date: December 20, 2019
    • State of filing: Illinois

    Defendant

    • Name: Barings LLC BBC PH Kinzie LLC
    • Website: www.kinziehotel.com
    • Industry: Hotel, Restaurant and Leisure
    • Summary: Barings LLC owns and operates the Kinzie Hotel in downtown Chicago.

    Case Summary

    On December 20, 2019, Rasul Muhammad filed a Complaint in Illinois Federal court against Barings LLC BBC PH Kinzie LLC. Plaintiff Rasul Muhammad alleges that www.kinziehotel.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.1 accessibility standard(s).

    Case Details

    Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

    • Many features on the Website lacks alt. text, which is the invisible code embedded beneath a graphical image.
    • Many features on the Website also fail to add a label element or title attribute for each field.
    • The Website also contained a host of broken links, which is a hyperlink to a nonexistent or empty webpage.

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

    • Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. 
    • Declaratory Relief

    Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

    • A Declaratory Judgment that at the commencement of this action BARINGS 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 BARINGS 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) and 28 CFR § 36.504(a) 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 8 above;
    • An award of costs and expenses of this action;
    • 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;
    • An order certifying the Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) & (b)(2) and/or (b)(3), appointing Plaintiff as Class Representative, and his attorneys as Class Counsel; and
    • Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. 

    Comments