AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |
Back to Blog
![]() In not hearing the appeal from Domino’s Pizza, the Supreme Court cleared the way for Guillermo Robles, a blind man, to proceed with his lawsuit against the chain. Holding businesses that do not have an accessible website liable, does not violate their 14th Amendment right to due process.Title III of the ADA covers websites and apps that have a connection to a physical place of public accommodation, and.Domino’s Pizza, LLC, the Supreme Court has in effect upheld that: This ruling also opens up the flood gates for accessibility lawsuits. More so than ever before, businesses that delay in having their sites thoroughly evaluated for accessibility and remediated as necessary are at risk. This decision needs to be viewed as a loud wake-up call for businesses who want to avoid legal action and unwanted attention to what their websites might be lacking. Until now, the legal mandate surrounding the accessibility of websites and apps has been shrouded in ambiguity. Domino’s Pizza, LLC,* signaling a long-anticipated answer to an essential question: Does the Title III of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, which was written before the current digital landscape was ever envisioned, apply to websites and apps? Supreme Court declined to review the Ninth Circuit Court’s decision in Robles v. ![]()
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |