Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC
a promotional graphic telling you that PCI Compliance is no longer an annual exercise and that continuous monitory must be built in

CRUZ v CREATIVE APPAREL CONCEPTS, INC.

Filed June 10, 2020

Plaintiff

  • Name: Shael Cruz
  • Filing date: June 10, 2020
  • State of filing: New York

Defendant

  • Name: Creative Apparel Concepts, Inc.
  • Website: www.munkimunki.com
  • Industry: Apparel
  • Summary: Creative Apparel Concepts, Inc. manufactures and sells apparel, sleepwear, and accessories for women, men, and children under the brand name, munki munki.

Case Summary

On June 10, 2020, Shael Cruz filed a Complaint in New York Federal court against Creative Apparel Concepts, Inc.. Plaintiff Shael Cruz alleges that www.munkimunki.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.1 accessibility standard(s).

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

  • For example, 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 contain a proper label element or title attribute for each field.
  • Many pages on the Website also contain the same title elements. 
  • The Website also contains a host of broken links, which is a hyperlink to a nonexistent or empty webpage. 
  • A pop-up banner on the top of the website page allows for the user to close the banner by clicking on the “X”. The “X” provides for alternate text that lacks a proper description and as such cannot be interpreted by the screen reader and therefore it is not understood by the user. The “X”, at the time of the review had the alternate text of “Button” and not “Exit” or some other relevant term. The screen reader would read “Button” with no other description thus barring the user from any understanding as to what to do with the banner or the “X”.
  • The website contains images that are improperly or mislabeled. Specifically, an image found on the site does not contain text describing the image and the alternate text lacks a description and provides only the word “sell” as its related description. The issues described in 8(b) causes the screen reader to misinterpret or become inoperable for this
    image and as thus not allow the user to understand what information is being presented.
  • Images other than the ones described above exist where the image contains promotional or discount information integrated as part of the image. Neither the image description nor the alternate text properly describes the image but more 
    importantly fails to describe the promotion, discount in any form. A mouse over and the eventual reading of the text by a screen reader fails to provide the user any information regarding the promotion or discount and thus fails to provide the user sufficient information for deciding if they wish to take advantage of the opportunity presented.

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

  • Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq. 
  • New York City Human 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.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.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 his 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 City Human Rights Law and City Law;
  • Pre- and post-judgment interest;
  • An award of costs and expenses of this action together with
    reasonable attorneys’ and expert fees; and
  • Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

New YorkApparel

Application Security Isn’t Optional Anymore.