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.

Laurence Wills v. JOJU MT, LLC

Filed

Case details

Summary

According to the complaint, Laurence Wills, a visually impaired individual, is suing Joju MT, LLC for failing to make its website, www.jojuny.com, accessible as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Wills alleges that he encountered numerous barriers while attempting to order Vietnamese food from the website, which prevented him from accessing the services offered. The complaint cites specific issues such as missing alt-text and broken links that hindered his ability to navigate the site. Wills seeks a permanent injunction to require the defendant to make the website accessible and claims that the inaccessibility violates both the ADA and New York City Human Rights Law. He is represented by Stein Saks, PLLC.

About the defendant

Offers online services for ordering Vietnamese food, featuring traditional dishes and quality ingredients.

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 was denied the ability to order food due to website barriers.
  • Defendant 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.
  • Violations of the NYCHRL
  • Declaratory Relief

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • Permanent injunction to make the website accessible.
  • Compensatory damages for violations of civil rights.
  • Certification of the Class and Sub-Classes.

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.