Search

The article discusses the issue of accessibility of websites. It mentions the implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) which provides access to places of public accommodation, the lack of regulations from the U.S. Dept. of Justice regarding ADA accessibility for websites, and presents a sample of lawsuits and judgments regarding such access.

The article discusses the U.S. legal case National Federation of the Blind v. Uber Technologies which deals with the legal aspects of ride-sharing services and blind people, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the ability of customers to travel with their service dogs in ride-sharing service automobiles. The legal aspects of taxi companies are examined, along with U.S. racial discrimination claims and litigation involving sharing-economy businesses such as Lyft Inc.

The article presents a reprint of the article "Sites for Sore Eyes: People with disabilities want the Internet to be more accessible" that appeared in the February 2015 issue. It focuses on a lawsuit filed against Scribd, a digital library featuring an ebook and audiobook subscription service for its failure to make its site accessible to disabled people. It mentions lawsuits filed by vision-impaired and the deaf against companies for violation of Americans with Disabilities Act.

The article presents a reprint of the article "Noncompliance: Banks face a slew of suits over their ATMs" which appeared in June 2014 issue of the American Bar Association (ABA) Journal. It discusses the reasons for lawsuits filed against the banks for violating the Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It further mentions that the class actions are filed for disabled people being unable to access the automated teller machines (ATMs).

The article offers information on the law suits being filed against city officials in Denver, Colorado for banning certain dog breeds. It states that the city banned the pit bull breed of dog, which forced the people to file the suit that claimed that the bans violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. It mentions that Denver announced that it would retreat on its policy of impounding pit bulls identified as service animals by their owners.