Can we count your visit?

Our analytics service records the pages you view, so we can see which ones are useful. It saves a random ID in your browser, and we never use it for advertising. Read our privacy policy.

Mejico v. Viacom International Inc.

Filed

Case details

Summary

On March 19, 2021, Brittney Mejico filed a Complaint in California State court against VIACOM INTERNATIONAL INC.. Plaintiff Brittney Mejico alleges that www.nick.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.0 accessibility standard(s).

About the defendant

Viacom is the parent company of Nickelodeon, a children's television and video production company.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Empty or missing form labels which presents a problem because, if a form control does not have aproperly associated text label, the function or purpose of that form control may not be presented toscreen reader users. Form labels provide visible descriptions and larger clickable targets for formcontrols;
  • Broken ARIA references, which presents a problem because an aria-labelled by or ariadescribed by reference exists, but the target for the reference does not exist. ARIA labels anddescriptions will not be presented if the element referenced does not exist in the page; and
  • Redundant Links where adjacent links go to the same URL address which results in additionalnavigation and repetition for keyboard and screen reader users.

Legal claims

The laws the plaintiff says the defendant broke, called causes of action.

  • Violations of the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq.

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • For a judgment that Defendant violated Plaintiff’s rights under the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code § 51 et seq.
  • For a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Defendant to take the steps necessary to make the Websites readily accessible to and usable by visually-impaired individuals, but Plaintiff hereby expressly limit the injunctive relief to require the Defendant expend no more than $20,000 as the cost of injunctive relief;
  • An award of statutory minimum damages of $4,000 per violation pursuant to section 52(a) of the California Civil Code, however, Plaintiff expressly limit the total amount of recovery, including statutory damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and cost of injunctive relief not to exceed $74,999;
  • For attorneys’ fees and expenses pursuant to all applicable laws including, without limitation, California Civil Code § 52(a); however, Plaintiff expressly limits the total amount of recovery, including statutory damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and cost of injunctive relief not t exceed $74,999;
  • For pre-judgment interest to the extent permitted by law;
  • For costs of suit; and
  • For such other and further relief as the Court Deems just and proper.