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.

Howard Wilson v. Northerner Scandinavia, Inc.

Filed

Case details

Standards cited
WCAG 2.1

Summary

According to the complaint, Howard Wilson, a visually-impaired individual, is suing Northerner Scandinavia, Inc. for failing to make its website, www.nicokick.com, accessible to blind users, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Wilson alleges that he encountered numerous barriers while attempting to access the website to purchase Grizzly nicotine pouches, including missing alt-text and broken links. He seeks a permanent injunction requiring the defendant to comply with accessibility standards and to ensure that the website is usable by individuals with disabilities. The complaint also seeks class certification for all legally blind individuals who have faced similar issues with the website.

About the defendant

An online retailer specializing in nicotine products, particularly tobacco-leaf free nicotine pouches, offering a wide range of brands, strength levels, and flavor options.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Defendant’s website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
  • Plaintiff encountered barriers that denied him full and equal access to the website.
  • Defendant has failed to comply with WCAG 2.1 guidelines.

Legal claims

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

  • Violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq.
  • Declaratory Relief

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the Americans with Disabilities Act.
  • An order requiring Defendant to make its website fully compliant with the ADA.
  • Payment of nominal damages.
  • An award of costs and expenses of this action together with reasonable attorneys’ and expert fees.

Proposed class

The group of people the plaintiff asks to represent, so the case can cover them too.

All legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access Defendant’s Website and as a result have been denied access to the equal enjoyment of goods and services, during the relevant statutory period.