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.

Timothy Hernandez v. Gogo Furniture Corporation

Filed

Case details

Summary

According to the complaint, Timothy Hernandez, a visually impaired individual, is suing Gogo Furniture Corporation for failing to make their website, www.gogofurniture.com, accessible to blind users. The complaint alleges that the website contains numerous barriers that prevent visually impaired individuals from accessing its content and services, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL). Hernandez claims he attempted to purchase bedding accessories but was unable to due to these access barriers. He seeks a permanent injunction to require Gogo Furniture to comply with accessibility standards and to ensure that their website is usable for individuals with disabilities.

About the defendant

Offers a wide range of furniture collections and bedding products for online sale, including options for product updates and promotions.

What the complaint says

The problems the plaintiff describes with the website.

  • Defendant's website is inaccessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
  • Plaintiff was denied full and equal access to the website due to access 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 requiring Defendant to make the website accessible.
  • Compensatory damages for violations of civil rights under New York City Human Rights Law.
  • 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.