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.

Marcos Calcano v. Mill Supply Company, LLC

Filed

Case details

Standards cited
WCAG 2.0

Summary

According to the complaint, Marcos Calcano, a visually-impaired individual, is suing Mill Supply Company, LLC for failing to make its website accessible as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Calcano alleges that he encountered numerous barriers while attempting to access the website, which prevented him from obtaining information and purchasing products. The complaint cites violations of the ADA, New York State Human Rights Law, and New York City Human Rights Law, seeking a permanent injunction to require the defendant to improve website accessibility and compensatory damages for the alleged discrimination.

About the defendant

Operates an online retail store offering a variety of goods including hardware, building materials, and maintenance supplies.

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 multiple access barriers preventing full use of the website.
  • Defendant has failed to comply with WCAG 2.0 guidelines.

Legal claims

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

  • Violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.
  • Violations of the NYSHRL
  • Violations of the NYCHRL
  • Violation of GBL § 349

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • Permanent injunction requiring Defendant to make its Website accessible to individuals with disabilities.
  • Compensatory damages for violations of civil rights under New York State Human Rights Law and GBL § 349.
  • Reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.

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 offered by Defendant’s Website, during the relevant statutory period.