Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.

Blind Student Sues Target Over Website's Inaccessibility to Visually Impaired

Report Fraud
Case ID: 4652 | Consumer Products | 02/09/2006

A blind UC Berkeley student filed a lawsuit against Target Corp., claiming that the retailer is violating the civil rights of those who cannot see because its Web site is inaccessible to them.

Although it might seem odd that the blind would use a Web site like www.target.com, advocates for the blind claim that computer software and coding embedded in Web sites makes surfing the Internet as easy for those who cannot see as it is for those who can.

Blind people access Web sites using keyboards and screen-reading software that vocalizes the information others see on a computer screen. The complaint states that Target's site lacks "alt-text," an invisible code embedded beneath images on the Web site that screen-reading software uses to provide descriptions to the blind.

The lawsuit, filed in Alameda County Superior Court, claims that Target's website does not support such software, making the site useless to the blind -- a violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act and various state laws.

"Target thus excludes the blind from full and equal participation in the growing Internet economy that is increasingly a fundamental part of daily life," said the suit, which seeks class action certification.

Lawyers for the blind chose Target because of its popularity and because of a large number of complaints by blind patrons.

Target's site also has inaccessible image maps, the suit said. Image maps, when clicked on by sighted users, allow the patron to jump to other parts of the Web site. Without image maps, visitors to www.target.com must use a mouse to complete transactions -- preventing blind patrons from surfing the site or making online purchases, the suit said.


At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.

Other Consumer Products Cases of Interest

A class action has been filed in federal court alleging that the Latin Shopping Television Network and its parent company, the Crediamerica Group, have been systematically preying on and defrauding customers. The action is brought on behalf of all customers who have bought merchandise from either company since their formation (believed to be about January 1, 2000) and who did not receive it at all, within a reasonable time period, or as promised to the customer.
 
A class action lawsuit was filed against Home Warranty of America, Inc. which alleges that it systematically denies claims for coverage.
 
The "See Clearly Method" kits claim to improve eyesight without surgery, yet they are the target of a consumer fraud lawsuit. A judge has issued a temporary injunction against the kit makers, Vision Improvement Technologies. The kits included manuals and tapes that show eye exercises and other techniques. According to the lawsuit, the company has shipped out as many as 5,000 to 10,000 kits a month at a cost of about $350 each. About half of the consumers who received the kit returned it within the 30 days and were not obligated to make the full payment, but many who did not return it within the 30 days still sought a refund for various reasons.
 
Lawyers filed a a class action lawsuit against the operators of an alleged pyramid scheme in Louisville, Kentucky. The Phoenix Group and Eli Ohayon are named as defendants.
 
A class action has been filed against membership shopping warehouse operator PriceSmart, Inc. (Nasdaq: PSMT) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between December 20, 2001, and November 7, 2003. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities.
 
Several class actions have been filed against jewelry manufacturer and seller Topaz Group, Inc. (Amex: TPZ) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between March 21, 2002, and August 20, 2003. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities.
 
Become a LawCash Member - FREE!
'Find Money' E-Book
Weekly Email Alerts




privacy policy
Class Action Lawsuit Center || Product Recall Center || Consumer Complaint Center || About LawCash Link Exchange
Privacy Policy || Legal Policies || Terms & Conditions || Website Advertising Policy || Site Map || Top Lawsuits
LawCash® is a service of nola3, llc
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.

[ Home ]
LawCash
login
Justice is a click away.