ERIE – As its designated plaintiff, a local man considered legally blind will oversee a class action lawsuit against a Nevada-based retailer of bags and other merchandise, alleging its website does not support Screen Reader software for the visually-impaired and thus violates the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
Anthony Hammond Murphy of Erie first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on Feb. 16 versus LeSportsac, Inc., of Nevada.
(An amended version was filed on Sept. 20)
“Murphy is a natural person over the age of 18. He resides in and is a citizen of Erie, Pennsylvania, located in Erie County. He graduated from Edinboro University with a degree in sociology in 1999 and today he works for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Murphy is and, at all times relevant hereto, has been legally blind and is therefore a member of a protected class under the ADA and the regulations implementing the ADA. As a result of his blindness, Murphy relies on screen access software to access digital content, like an email, a website, or an app,” the suit says.
“Defendant is a Nevada corporation with a principal place of business in Nevada. Defendant sells bags and more to consumers. In order to access, research, or purchase the products and services that defendant offers, Murphy may visit defendant’s digital properties, located at https://www.lesportsac.com/. Defendant owns, operates and/or controls its digital platform and is responsible for the policies, practices, and procedures concerning the digital platform’s development and maintenance.”
The suit adds that due to “the defendant’s failure to build its digital platform in a manner that is compatible with screen access software, including VoiceOver, Murphy is unable to understand, and thus is denied the benefit of, much of the content and services he wishes to access from his smartphone.”
Notice of a proposed settlement agreement between the parties was filed on Nov. 21 and two weeks later, on Dec. 5, counsel for the plaintiff brought forward an unopposed motion to certify the class, for future settlement purposes.
Per the terms of the settlement, the defendant would make the following immediate changes:
• Ensure the U.S. portions of any new websites are accessible upon their release;
• Ensure the U.S. portions of any subsequently acquired websites are accessible within 18 months of their acquisition;
• Request that vendors provide third-party content that is accessible;
• Provide accessibility training to defendant’s newly-hired employees responsible for website content, design, development, or maintenance, if any, within 180 days of their hire date;
• Train defendant’s customer service personnel, if any, to assist screen reader users;
• Request that third-party customer service personnel, if any, are trained to assist screen reader users;
• Perform semi-annual automated accessibility audits to evaluate whether the digital properties are accessible;
• Perform annual end-user accessibility testing to evaluate whether the digital properties are accessible;
• Provide annual refresher accessibility training to defendant’s employees responsible for website content, design, development, or maintenance, if any.
Other terms involve bringing the website into compliance over a period of 3 to 18 months, after the settlement would be finalized.
A hearing will take place on Jan. 19 regarding the unopposed motion.
Federal court records indicate that since July 2019, Murphy has filed 128 separate cases against various businesses in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, featuring similar allegations.
For counts of violating Title III of the ADA, the plaintiff is seeking a long list of reliefs, including a declaration that the defendant’s conduct violated the ADA, a permanent injunction which directs the defendant to take all steps necessary to communicate the content of its Digital Platform to screen reader users, other forms of compliance to enforce same, actual, statutory, nominal and other damages the Court deems proper, costs of suit, reasonable attorneys’ fees, including costs of monitoring defendant’s compliance with the judgment, whatever other relief the Court deems just, equitable and appropriate; and an Order retaining jurisdiction over this case until the defendant has complied with the Court’s orders.
The plaintiff is represented by Chandler Steiger, Kevin Abramowicz, Kevin W. Tucker and Stephanie Moore of East End Trial Group and Lawrence H. Fisher of LawFirst, all in Pittsburgh.
The defendant is represented by J. David Ziegler of Dickie McCamey & Chilcote, also in Pittsburgh.
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania case 1:22-cv-00058
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com