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.

Milton Williams v. The Biltmore Company, LLC

Filed

Case details

Standards cited
WCAG 2.0

Summary

According to the complaint, Milton Williams, a visually-impaired individual, is suing The Biltmore Company, LLC for failing to make its website accessible to blind users, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Williams alleges that he encountered numerous barriers while trying to access the website, which prevented him from obtaining information and making purchases. The complaint seeks injunctive relief to ensure the website is accessible and includes claims under state laws for discrimination against individuals with disabilities. Williams is also seeking compensatory damages and attorneys' fees.

About the defendant

Operates an online retail store offering a variety of goods including gifts, clothing, food, books, and jewelry.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Defendant's website is not accessible to blind and visually-impaired persons.
  • Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers while attempting to use 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
  • 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.

  • A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the ADA and related laws.
  • 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.