Written by Susan Kohn Ross, Jonathan Turner and Celia Guzman In a decision that is expected to curtail the high volume of website accessibility claims, the California Court of Appeal held that (1) purely online businesses are not covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”); and (2) the discriminatory effect of a facially neutral policy or action alone does not satisfy the “intentional discrimination” … Continue reading CA Court of Appeal Clarifies that Purely Online Businesses Are Not Covered by the ADA
Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) mandates that public accommodation must be provided to disabled persons to allow for the “full and equal enjoyment” of the related privileges, goods, services, advantages and accommodations as those provided to able bodied persons. The owner of any business is responsible for making sure those accommodations are made with “reasonable modification.” The ADA makes it very clear that a business that does not provide for that accommodation is engaging in unlawful discrimination 42 U.S.C. section 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii).
The statute provides for various examples of where public accommodations must be provided, including locations such as an inn, a restaurant, a theater, an auditorium, a bakery, a laundromat, a depot, a museum, a zoo, a nursery, a day care center, and a gymnasium. Noticeably absent from that list are websites. That’s because websites did not exist at the time the statute was passed, and Congress has not expressly addressed the issue in the interim. Continue reading “Website Accessibility – Americans with Disabilities Act Impact”