Skip to main content
Accessibility.com, LLC

MAHLBERG v. THE ART OF SHAVING-FL, LLC

Filed May 23, 2019

Plaintiff

  • Name: Raymond T. Mahlberg
  • Filing date: May 23, 2019
  • State of filing: Florida

Defendant

  • Name: The Art of Shaving-FL, LLC
  • Website: www.theartofshaving.com
  • Industry: Beauty
  • Summary: The Art of Shaving, LLC develops, produces, and markets aromatherapy-based shaving and skincare products for men and women.

Case Summary

On May 23, 2019, Raymond T. Mahlberg filed a Complaint in Florida Federal court against The Art of Shaving-FL, LLC . Plaintiff Raymond T. Mahlberg alleges that www.theartofshaving.com is not accessible per the WCAG 2.0 accessibility standard(s).

Case Details

Plaintiff alleges issues in its Complaint including the following:

  • the Website is not functional for users who are visually impaired. The Website contains several types of PETs, easily identifiable and correctable, which occur throughout the Website such as:
    • All field-set elements should be labeled with legend elements
    • Each a element must contain text or an img with an alt attribute
    • Image elements must have an ALT attribute
    • Form control has no label and no programmatically determined name.
    • A form control does not have a corresponding label
    • iframe and frame elements must have title attributes.
  • The Website contains various types of PATs, prone to making the website inaccessible, which occur throughout the Website

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

  • Violations of the ADA

Plaintiff seeks the following relief by way of its Complaint:

  • Issue a declaratory judgment that Defendant has violated Plaintiff’s rights as guaranteed by the ADA
  • Enter an Order requiring Defendant to update its https://www.theartofshaving.com website to remove barriers in order that individuals with visual disabilities can access the Website and effectively communicate with the Website to the full extent required by Title III of the ADA
  • Enter an Order requiring Defendant to update all electronic documents made available to the public to remove barriers in order that individuals with visual disabilities can access the electronic documents to effectively communicate with Defendant to the full extent required by Title III of the ADA
  • Enter an Order for 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 the electronic documents which it provides on its electronic media into full compliance with the requirements set forth in the ADA, and its implementing regulations, so that all Electronic documents are fully accessible to, and independently usable by, blind and low sighted 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 Defendant to remain fully in compliance with the law
  • Enter an Order requiring Defendant to clearly display the sign of website accessibility (standard WCAG 2.0) within its Website. Such a clear display is to ensure that individuals who are disabled are aware of the availability of the accessible features of the website
  • Enter an Order compelling Defendant to contract with an independent ADA expert/consultant for the purposes of that ADA expert/consultant review Defendant’s policies, practices and procedures for five years commencing from the date of the Court’s Order to ensure that Defendant is in compliance with the ADA
  • The Court enter an order requiring Defendant to provide ongoing support for web accessibility by implementing a website accessibility coordinator, a website application accessibility policy, and providing for website accessibility feedback to insure compliance thereto
  • Enter an Order requiring Defendant retain a qualified consultant acceptable to Plaintiff (“Mutually Agreed Upon Consultant”) who shall assist it in improving the accessibility of its electronic documents so they are accessible to individuals with visual disabilities
  • Require Defendant engage a (mutually agreed upon) Consultant to perform an automated accessibility audit on a periodic basis to evaluate whether Defendant’s electronic documents continue to be accessible to individuals with visual disabilities
  • Enter an Order directing Defendant to evaluate its policies, practices and procedures toward persons with disabilities, for such reasonable time so as to allow Defendant to undertake and complete corrective procedures to the Website
  • The Court award damages in an amount to be determined at trial
  • The Court to award Plaintiff reasonable litigation expenses and attorneys’ fees
  • That the Court award such other and further relief as it deems necessary, just and proper.

FloridaBeauty