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.

Julie Dalton v. Jack Archer, Inc.

Filed

Case details

Standards cited
WCAG 2.1

Summary

According to the complaint, Julie Dalton, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, is suing Jack Archer, Inc. for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). The plaintiff alleges that the defendant’s website, www.jackarcher.com, is not fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision, which violates the ADA's requirements for effective communication. Key alleged barriers include unclear links, inaccessible size charts, and insufficient text for images. The plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to require the defendant to make its website accessible, along with damages and civil penalties.

About the defendant

Defendant offers men’s apparel including shirts, sweaters, blazers, pants, shorts, hats, belts, socks, and accessories.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Defendant’s Website is not fully accessible to people who are blind or have low vision.
  • Plaintiff encountered barriers that denied her full and equal access to Defendant’s online goods, content, and services.
  • Defendant's policies fail to ensure its Website is fully accessible to individuals with vision-related disabilities.

Legal claims

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

  • Violation of Title III of the ADA
  • Violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA)

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • Permanent injunction requiring Defendant to make its Website accessible.
  • Civil penalty payable to the state of Minnesota.
  • Damages and a damage multiplier.

Proposed class

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

All blind or have a low vision disability within the meaning of the ADA who use screen reader auxiliary aids to navigate digital online content and who have accessed, attempted to access, or who may access or attempt to access Defendant’s Website.