Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC

KOLESAR v. DANNER, INC.

Filed March 14, 2019

Plaintiff

  • Name: Matthew Kolesar
  • Filing date: March 14, 2019
  • State of filing: Pennsylvania

Defendant

  • Name: Danner, Inc.
  • Website: www.danner.com
  • Industry: Apparel
  • Summary: Danner Inc., is a footwear manufacturer.

Case Summary

On March 14, 2019, Matthew Kolesar filed a Complaint in Pennsylvania Federal court against Danner, Inc.. Plaintiff Matthew Kolesar alleges that www.danner.com is not accessible.

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

  • The Website does not provide a text equivalent for non-text elements
  • The Website uses visual cues to convey content and other information to sighted users
  • The Website uses color as the only means of conveying information, indicating an action, prompting a response, or distinguishing a visual element
  • The foreground and background color combinations of the Website provide insufficient contrast
  • Some functionality is not operable through a keyboard interface
  • The Website prevents screen reader users who navigate sequentially through content from accessing some primary content directly
  • Links and buttons on the Website do not describe their purpose

Plaintiff asserts the following cause(s) of action in its Complaint:

  • Title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12181 et seq.

Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

  • A Declaratory Judgment that at the commencement of this action Defendant was in violation of the specific requirements of Title III of the ADA described above, and the relevant implementing regulations of the ADA, in that Defendant took no action that was reasonably calculated to ensure that its Websites are fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with visual disabilities
  • A permanent injunction pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12188(a)(2) and 28 CFR § 36.504(a) which directs Defendant to take all steps necessary to bring its Websites into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that its Websites are fully accessible to, and independently usable by, blind individuals, and which further directs that the Court shall retain jurisdiction for a period to be determined to ensure that Defendant has adopted and is following an institutional policy that will in fact cause it to remain fully in compliance with the law—the specific injunctive relief requested by Plaintiffs is described more fully in paragraph 12 above
  • Payment of actual, statutory, and other damages, as the Court deems proper
  • Payment of costs of suit
  • Payment of reasonable attorneys’ fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205 and 28 CFR § 36.505, including costs of monitoring Defendant’s compliance with the judgment (see Gniewkowski v. Lettuce Entertain You Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-01898-AJS (W.D. Pa. Jan. 11, 2018) (ECF 191); see also Access Now, Inc. v. Lax World, LLC, No. 1:17-cv-10976-DJC (D. Mass. Apr. 17, 2018) (ECF 11)
  • Whatever other relief the Court deems just, equitable and appropriate
  • An Order retaining jurisdiction over this case until Defendant has complied with the Court’s Orders

ApparelPennsylvania