ADA Title III Website-Accessibility Cases
After Robles v. Domino's, a consumer-facing website with a nexus to goods and services is a place of public accommodation in the Ninth Circuit, and WCAG 2.1 AA is the de-facto measuring stick. The recurring defense play is remediation mootness — fix the site after service, move to dismiss. A sealed, timestamped audit defeats it: the violation record survives the cleanup.
Elements & controlling authority
- Plaintiff is disabled within the meaning of the ADA
42 USC § 12102; 28 CFR § 36.105. - Defendant owns or operates a place of public accommodation; the website has a nexus to goods and services
42 USC § 12182(a); Robles v. Domino's Pizza, 913 F.3d 898, 905–06 (9th Cir. 2019). - Plaintiff was denied full and equal enjoyment due to access barriers
42 USC § 12182(b)(2)(A)(iii) (auxiliary aids); Robles, 913 F.3d at 907 (WCAG as equitable benchmark). - Plaintiff encountered the barriers or was deterred from access
Chapman v. Pier 1 Imports, 631 F.3d 939, 944 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc) (deterrence standing). - State-law damages hook — Unruh or NYSHRL
Cal. Civ. Code § 52(a) ($4,000 minimum per offense via Unruh § 51(f)); N.Y. Exec. Law § 296(2)(a).
The evidence you need — and what we capture
- axe-core WCAG 2.1 AA audit restricted to standards-mapped rules — best-practice-only findings excluded
- Per-URL violations with critical/serious/moderate/minor impact tiers, including checkout-path barriers (the Robles nexus fact)
- SHA-256 hash-chained, RFC 3161-timestamped capture — the violation snapshot survives post-service remediation
Every capture is sealed at collection: SHA-256 hash-chained artifacts with RFC 3161 trusted timestamps, a methodology block, and a documented scope of audit. If the defendant changes the site tomorrow, the record of today survives.
Damages framework
Title III itself provides injunctive relief and fees (42 USC § 12205); the damages engine is state law — Unruh's $4,000 statutory minimum per offense for California visitors, and NYSHRL compensatory damages in New York.
Frequently asked
Is a website a place of public accommodation under the ADA?
In the Ninth Circuit, a consumer-facing website with a nexus to goods and services is covered — Robles v. Domino's Pizza (2019), with WCAG 2.1 AA as the de-facto benchmark.
How do you defeat a remediation-mootness defense?
A timestamped, hash-chained audit preserves the violation record as of the capture date, so a defendant that fixes the site after service cannot moot the documented barriers.
What damages are available in an ADA website case?
Title III provides injunctive relief and fees; the damages engine is state law — California's Unruh Act ($4,000 per offense) and New York's Human Rights Law.
Pre-vetted defendants in this lane are live on the marketplace. Each listing clears arbitration-posture review, a prior-litigation screen against the federal docket, and a human editorial gate before it appears. First buyer takes the defendant exclusively.
Browse 32 live ADA Title III Website-Accessibility listings →