Email us today on attorneys@steinllp.com
WEB ACCESSIBILITY
Over the past few years, there has been an explosion of lawsuits filed by people claiming that company websites are inaccessible to the visually or hearing impaired in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and equivalent state laws. These lawsuits often come out of the blue, without the company ever having received a warning or complaint from a disabled person. And they often target small companies across the country that never intended to discriminate against anyone.
These lawsuits are oftentimes brought by “serial plaintiffs,” who regularly sue companies en masse – using boilerplate complaints – for the allegedly inaccessible websites. They then demand tens of thousands of dollars to drop their lawsuits. These lawsuits need to be taken seriously, as companies potentially face ruinous damages and litigation costs if they lose. These filers, however, might not be legitimate, bona fide plaintiffs with standing to bring these claims. Even if they are, that does not mean that they are entitled to large sums of money. And sometimes, the supposedly inaccessible websites, in fact, do not pose accessibility barriers at all.
STEIN & NIEPORENT LLP successfully has defended its clients against precisely this new kind of opportunistic litigation. Our attorneys are seasoned, aggressive litigation strategists. We know the intricacies and nuances of the relevant laws and their applicability to class action lawsuits. Because we regularly appear in federal court, we are well-acquainted with the judges and with many of the lawyers who bring these kinds of cases. We can evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the case against your company to achieve the best possible outcome. And we also can steer you towards compliance so that these sorts of lawsuits do not trouble your company again.
DO NOT despair if your company has been targeted by one of these serial plaintiffs; many companies have faced the same predicament. Turn to us for help and guidance. We have the experience that your company needs now.
WEB ACCESSIBILITY FAQ
A blind or visually impaired person (or occasionally a hearing impaired person) is claiming that he or she tried to use your website but could not because there were problems with the way the site was built. Visually impaired people use special software to read websites to them, and the plaintiff is claiming that your site is not compatible with the software, which is discriminatory. It is similar to a person in a wheelchair claiming that a physical store was not designed to allow for wheelchair access.
Yes! If you have been served with a lawsuit like this, please contact us to schedule a free consultation. We will discuss your options and help you make the best of an unfortunate situation.
Unfortunately, yes. There is no minimum size threshold for website accessibility cases. It does not matter how many employees you have or how much business you do. The biggest national brands — Apple Inc., Dominos Pizza, Winn-Dixie — have been targets of these lawsuits, but so have companies that have no employees and do a few thousand dollars’ worth of business per month.
If you transact business on the Internet, people nationwide, including New York, can generally do business with you. If they can, you are subject to jurisdiction here.
Some courts in some parts of the country have said that. But in New York, the courts have routinely held that the laws apply to commercial websites. And it is the laws where the plaintiff lives that control.
The laws do not require that a plaintiff register a complaint before filing an ADA lawsuit. And all that matters is whether the plaintiff tried to do business with you, not whether those tries were successful.
Unfortunately, no. First, be careful — most free tools only check your home page, not your entire website. But your whole website, every single page, needs to be compliant with the law. But second, just because you say that your site is compliant does not mean the plaintiff will agree. That’s what the lawsuit is for — to resolve that dispute.
Many companies rely on such “quick fixes." They might work, but plaintiffs routinely argue these services do not make websites fully accessible. Courts have not yet ruled on whether these quick fixes are good enough, but it’s very risky. Remember that if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
If you ignore it, the plaintiff will win by default. The plaintiff will get a judgment against your company, awarding damages and attorneys’ fees, and will get a court order to require you to fix your website. This is no different than any other judgment — they can come after you to collect. And if you don’t obey the order, you will be in contempt of court.
The following is a list of many of the attorneys – and their clients – who regularly bring web accessibility cases.
i. Jeffrey Gottlieb/Michael LaBollita of Gottlieb & Associates. Their primary plaintiffs include Cedric Bishop, Evelina Calcano, Emanuel Delacruz, Sandy Graciano, Donna Hedges, Braulio Thorne, Henry Tucker, Milton Williams, Lawrence Young, Yony Sosa, Juan Roman, and Arturo Stevez.
ii. Mark Rozenberg of Stein Saks. His main clients are Jenisa Angeles and Frankie Monegro.
iii. Douglas Lipsky and Christopher Lowe of Lipsky Lowe. Their usual clients are Brian Fischler, Lynnette Tatum-Rios, Kareem Nisbett, and Thomas J. Olsen.
iv. Bradley Marks of The Marks Law Firm. His plaintiffs are typically Luc Burbon and Eugene Duncan.
v. Mars Khaimov of Mars Khaimov Law. His regular clients are Dilenia Paguada, Josue Paguada, Jose Quezada, and Raymond Gonzalez.
vi. Joseph Mizrahi of Cohen & Mizrahi LLP. His plaintiffs include Shael Cruz, Josue Romero, Christian Sanchez, and Domingo Pascual.
vii. Yitzchak Zelman of Marcus & Zelman. He routinely represents Irene Hecht, Kevin Davis, and Ramon Jaquez.
viii. Dan Shaked or Shaked Law Group. His clients include Rasheta Bunting, Mary Conner, Aretha Crosson, Kahlimah Jones, Marion Kiler, Pedro Martinez, Angel Rodriguez, Linda Slade, and Denette Ligon.
ix. Justin Zeller. He represents Eugene Duncan and Donna Hedges.
x. Benjamin Sweet and Jonathan Miller. They frequently represent Karen Blachowicz, Christopher Walters, Ian Foley, Sylvia Santos, and Sam Wilson.
xi. Jonathan Shalom of Shalom Law. His main client is Michelle Tenzer-Fuchs.
xii. Mitchell Segal of Law Offices of Mitchell Segal. He often represents Jay Winegard and Yaroslav Suris.
FLSA / WAGE AND HOUR LAW
Have you been sued by an employee or a former employee who claims that he was not paid correctly? The federal and state wage and hour laws are complex, tripping up employers both big and small. Even if you tried to do everything “by the book," that will not protect you if you did not pay your employees correctly. And even a single mistake in how you handle your payroll or how you keep records can cost you and your company tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.
But do not despair! The lawyers of STEIN & NIEPORENT LLP can assist you. We have been handling cases of this nature since 2008, and because we handle these cases on both the employee side and the employer side, we understand the nuances of these laws and know how plaintiffs’ lawyers approach these cases.
Common issues that trip employers up include:
Running a business is hard even at the best of times. We know, because we are business owners too. And in these times, it can be an almost insurmountable struggle. If you are unfamiliar with the law, you risk significant personal and business liability. STEIN & NIEPORENT LLP can help to make your already difficult job that much easier. We can represent you if you have been sued, and we can teach employers how to comply with the laws to avoid being sued. Please contact us for a free consultation, and we can discuss how we can assist you.
1441 Broadway Suite #6090
New York, NY. 10018