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.

Andres Gomez v. Heritage Golf Group, Inc.

Filed

Case details

Summary

On February 19, 2019, Open Access For All, Inc. Andres Gomez filed a Complaint in Florida Federal court against Heritage Golf Group, Inc.. Plaintiff Open Access For All, Inc. Andres Gomez alleges that www.tpcprestancia.com/about-us is not accessible.

About the defendant

Heritage Golf Group, Inc. owns and operates the golf club, TPC Prestancia. The golf club contains two golf courses and a practice facility. Membership is open to the public.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Website is not designed with consideration for Universal design.
  • Website does not have the indication of website accessibility.

Legal claims

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

  • Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.

What the plaintiff asks for

What the plaintiff wants the court to order.

  • Declaratory judgment that Defendant has violated Plaintiffs’ rights as guaranteed by the ADA;
  • Order requiring Defendant to update its https://www.tpcprestancia.com/about-us/ website to remove barriers in order that individuals with visual disabilities can access the Website and effectively communicate with the Website to the full extent required by Title III of the ADA;
  • Order requiring Defendant to clearly display the universal disabled logo and sign of website accessibility (standard WCAG 2.0) within its Website. Such a clear display is to ensure that individuals who are disabled are aware of the availability of the accessible features of the https://www.tpcprestancia.com/about-us/ website;
  • Order compelling Defendant to contract with an independent ADA expert/consultant for the purposes of that ADA expert/consultant review Defendant’s policies, practices and procedures for five years commencing from the date of the Court’s Order to ensure that Defendant is in compliance with the ADA;
  • The Court enter an order requiring Defendant to retain an accessibility coordinator and a third-party consultant to review and guide Defendant through its accessibility creation and procedures to insure compliance thereto;
  • Order requiring Defendant to provide ongoing support for web accessibility by implementing a website accessibility coordinator, a website application accessibility policy, and providing for website accessibility feedback to insure compliance thereto;
  • Order directing Defendant to evaluate its policies, practices and procedures toward persons with disabilities, for such reasonable time so as to allow Defendant to undertake and complete corrective procedures to the Website;
  • Damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
  • Reasonable litigation expenses and attorneys’ fees; and
  • Such other and further relief as it deems necessary, just and proper.