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.

Washington Moran v. Fedex Corporation

Filed

Case details

Summary

According to the complaint, plaintiff Washington Moran, a visually-impaired individual, alleges that FedEx Corporation has failed to make its website accessible, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaint states that Moran has encountered multiple barriers while attempting to use the website, which has prevented him from accessing services and products offered online. The plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to require FedEx to make its website accessible and claims that the lack of accessibility has caused him frustration and humiliation. The case is filed in the Southern District of New York, and the plaintiff is represented by Gottlieb & Associates PLLC.

About the defendant

Operates an online retail store and provides printing services and products, including information about pricing, terms of service, and other goods.

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 on the website.
  • Defendant has failed to comply with the ADA and other relevant laws.

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.

  • Permanent injunction requiring Defendant to make its website accessible.
  • Compensatory damages for violations of civil rights.
  • Attorney’s 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.