Almost every claim brought under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act raises standing issues because, in almost every case, the lawsuit is the result of a plaintiff, usually sponsored by a law firm, seeking out an ADA violation in order to make money off a quick settlement.¹ The Supreme Court’s June 25, 2021 decision in Transunion LLC v. Ramirez, No. 20-297 (June 24, 2021) will significantly limit, but probably not eliminate modern industrial scale ADA litigation. More
Quick Hits – Memorial Day Edition
Once again – as in past Memorial Day editions – I’m firing up the grill with hundred dollar bills in honor of the money wasted on lawyers, who are the only ones who really benefit from most ADA and FHA litigation. There are, however, some cases dealing addressing important substantive issues, and few in which Courts seem ready to turn the ADA and FHA into laws to help people instead of laws to make lawyers rich. More
Tester standing under the ADA – Getting it wrong, getting it right, and an interesting but irrelevant analysis.
Three cases in the last thirty days look at ADA standing and reach different conclusions about what the Constitution and the ADA require. For victims of serial litigation and for courts interested in the coherent application of the text of the ADA and similar statutes these are crucial cases.² More
Hunt among experts featured in Usablenet celebration of Global Accessibility Awareness Day
I apologize for not having posted a new blog for several weeks, but I have been busy on other projects, including the video posted at Industry experts explain what digital accessibility awareness means to them for Usablenet’s celebration of Global Accessibility of Awareness Day. All the videos are worthwhile, but if you don’t have time to listen, my comments in a nutshell are simple. A business is aware of digital accessibility if it understands that those with disabilities can an do use digital resources like websites and mobile applications, that accessibility gives businesses access to and a competitive advantage in a significant market, and that if designed in from the beginning accessibility need not be cost prohibitive. I also point out that typical serial website lawsuits are a very poor way to create accessibility awareness in the business community because even though thousands of lawsuits are filed, they represent a tiny fraction (no more than 3 in ten thousand) of the lawsuits filed against businesses every year and will therefore never have a lasting impact on businesses with many other concerns and obligations. DOJ and disability advocates should be looking for positive ways to engage with the business community, not supporting efforts that accomplish little more than making a few lawyers rich.
Hunt to Speak at the 3rd Annual Digital Accessibility Legal Summit
On October 7-8 I’ll be joining Jason Taylor of Usablenet and Jeremy Horlick of ADA Site Compliance at American University’s Digital Accessibility Legal Summit in a panel discussion of accessibility overlays, widgets and plug-ins titled “The Great Accessibility Overlays Battle.” You can find the complete program at www.accessibility.legal. As you know, the use of widgets and overlays has generated some controversy, with makers of this software claiming they can create an accessible website and every credible consultant claiming they cannot. You can read my blogs about his subject at Is there a silver bullet for ADA website accessibility? Sorry, but the answer is no. and Thanks for the shout-out Lainey – a website plug-in followup. Those looking for an interesting technical analysis of the differences between various products will find one by Jason Taylor at https://blog.usablenet.com/inclusive-accessibility-crushes-widgets-and-overlays. Any attorney with clients who own a website – and that should be most of us – will find the entire Summit usefuls. The need for digital accessibility and the risk when it is absent colors every kind of business and consumer transaction, so keeping up to date is critical.