Target Lawsuit Given Class-Action Status

Class Action News

[##_1L|1174327420.jpg|width="120" height="88" alt=""|_##]A federal judge granted class-action status to a lawsuit alleging that Target Corp. is breaking California and federal law by failing to make its Web site usable for the blind. The plaintiffs fault Target for not adopting technology used by other companies to make Web sites accessible to the blind. The technology allows reading software to vocalize invisible code embedded in computer graphics and describe content on a Web page.

Granting class-action status allows blind people throughout the country who have tried to access Target.com to become plaintiffs in the suit, which alleges violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act.

Judge Marilyn Hall Patel also on Friday approved a separate class, made up of blind California residents who have attempted to use the site, to address the suit's charges that Target is violating state laws governing civil and disabled rights.

"This is a tremendous step forward for blind people throughout the country who for too long have been denied equal access to the Internet economy," said Dr. Marc Maurer, president of the National Federation of the Blind. "All e-commerce businesses should take note of this decision and immediately take steps to open their doors to the blind."

The federation filed the suit - which originally was filed in California state court in February 2006 and moved at Target's request to San Francisco federal court the following month - on behalf of federation member and northern California resident Bruce Sexton. The suit alleged that "blind individuals have been and are being denied equal access to Target stores" and the "service and benefits offered to the public through Target.com."

Judge Patel's order Friday noted that Target has modified its Web site some since the suit's filing to make the site more accessible to the blind. Target claimed the suit should therefore be dismissed, but Judge Patel ruled against that argument.

Related listings

  • Class action suit against CPR over TCE leak

    Class action suit against CPR over TCE leak

    Class Action News 10/03/2007

    [##_1L|1237521364.jpg|width="130" height="98" alt=""|_##]The Alberta Court of Appeal has approved a class action lawsuit against Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) by residents of the Ogden area of Calgary, who are suing CPR for contaminating groundwater...

  • Refco Shareholders Sue Law Firm Over IPO

    Refco Shareholders Sue Law Firm Over IPO

    Class Action News 10/02/2007

    [##_1L|1249220135.jpg|width="120" height="138" alt=""|_##]Refco Inc. shareholders on Monday sued the Chicago law firm that advised the company in its $583 million initial public offering in 2005, saying it knowingly participated in a fraud that "cost...

  • Apple Facing Class-Action Suits over iPhone Locking

    Apple Facing Class-Action Suits over iPhone Locking

    Class Action News 10/01/2007

    [##_1L|1332181999.jpg|width="200" height="150" alt=""|_##]Apple has released a new update for the iPhone that turns it into a brick if the user runs the hack software on it that allows it to be used on any network. This of course has not pleased many...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read