Aspects of the site weren’t compatible with screen readers, so he was unable to order his medications online or download rewards cards. The plaintiff claimed the site violated the ADA in 2017. Juan Carlos Gil, the blind plaintiff, sued Winn Dixie. One positive takeaway for the disability community is that fighting this lawsuit for Winn-Dixie has not been about if the grocer should make their website accessible, but if a plaintiff could force digital accessibility via an ADA lawsuit. In fact, their website's accessibility statement acknowledges the importance and current commitment to accessibility. A judge decided that Winn Dixie’s limited accessibility site, at the time of the lawsuit in 2017, didn’t violate the rights of the blind plaintiff under the ADA,Ī lot has been written on this most recent decision which we outline below, but it's worth noting that Winn-Dixie and Southeastern Grocers have not ignored accessibility since the start of this case. The April 7th, 2021 decision in the Florida 11th Circuit Court, however, broke with this trend. This meant that they needed to make reasonable accommodations for accessibility for all users. For the better part of the past two decades, it’s been a well-established legal argument that organization's websites and Apps were covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
0 kommentar(er)
