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. New Era Cap, LLC

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 New Era Cap, LLC 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.neweracap.com, is not fully accessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision, which denies them equal access to the goods and services offered online. Key alleged barriers include the website's failure to provide adequate screen reader support and the lack of accessible content. The plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to require the defendant to make its website accessible, along with damages and civil penalties.

About the defendant

Offers hats and clothing for sale including team logo hats, branded hats, fitted hats, outerwear, hoodies, tops, bottoms, backpacks, bags, 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 failed to provide auxiliary aids and services necessary for effective communication.

Legal claims

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

  • Violation of Title III of the ADA
  • Violation of the 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.