Case studies
Most write-ups of accessibility litigation repeat each other, and a surprising number of the details they repeat are wrong. These studies are built from the filings and the judgments: what users alleged, what courts found, how the claim was defended, what the record does and does not say, and the points where each dispute could have ended sooner.
Updated September 2026Reviewed by The Accessibility.build team
A blind customer could not complete a pizza order through Domino's website or app. The resulting six-year case established how the ADA's physical-place nexus applies to those digital services in the Ninth Circuit.
Read the case study
The only web accessibility case to go through a full trial. A blind customer won an injunction against a grocery chain, an appeals court reversed two to one, and then erased its own opinion because the injunction had expired while the appeal waited. Nothing it decided binds anyone.
Read the case study
The first web accessibility ruling against a retailer. A blind student could not buy towels for his dorm room. The 2006 order created the nexus test every later case has argued about, a nationwide class was certified, and Target settled for a $6 million fund and three years of monitoring.
Read the case study
Every claim comes from a filing, a judgment, a docket or a named public statement, and each study links its sources. Where a figure is widely repeated but cannot be traced to the record, the study says so instead of passing it on. Where a case is commonly misdescribed, there is a section setting the claim against what the record actually holds.
These pages are analysis, not legal advice. For the current filing numbers see the accessibility lawsuit tracker, and for the law by jurisdiction see the compliance guides.
Comprehensive tools, checklists, and guides to help you create inclusive digital experiences