[blindlaw] nfb v. target

Scott C. LaBarre slabarre at labarrelaw.com
Sun Mar 15 02:19:25 UTC 2009


The standards used are those of WCAG and Sec. 508.  I did not work directly 
on Target and cannot tell you exactly the access barriers.  I can tell you 
that with respect to filing applications to law schools through LSAC on 
their website, it is impossible to fill those applications out 
independently using screen reading softaware.  Let me also assure list 
members that we don't simply jump on a website, encounter difficulty, and 
then sue them the next day.  A lawsuit is the last resort when the entity is 
not willing to deal with us otherwise.  Just because we are a small minority 
does not mean that our right to the mainstream of society must always be 
subservient to the majority's unwillingness to consider us due to our small 
numbers.  Unless someone has a new point to be made on this topic, I 
respectfully suggest that we move onto different discussions.  Let's also 
agree to disagree on certain points.
Scott C. LaBarre, Esq.

LaBarre Law Offices P.C.
1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918
Denver, Colorado 80222
303 504-5979 (voice)
303 757-3640 (fax)
slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail)
www.labarrelaw.com (website)

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and privileged 
information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not read, 
copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message in 
error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or slabarre at labarrelaw.com, 
and destroy and delete it from your system. This message and any attachments 
are covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 8:52 AM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] nfb v. target


What troubles me is that my question of accessibility standards has not been
answered on the other case against the LSAC.  The same question is
applicable here.  What standard was used to conclude that the web site was
not accessible?  I do not claim to be a genius at manipulating technology to
serve my needs, but I did not have to try hard at all to make Target give me
what I needed between 2005 and 2008.  So is the problem the web site layout,
or is it our own technology training?  Rather than chase every entity with
features a few people deem inaccessible, would it not be prudent to take our
standards, whatever those may be, to the classroom, to the software
developers, the relevant associations raising the performance standards of
its students and members?  This method of engineering change gives us the
perception of a watchdog group.  If this is what we have become, and given
the small margin of the population we represent, I would rather trigger
change at the source rather than at the output.

Joe Orozco

"A man who wants to lead the orchestra must turn his back on the
crowd."--Max Lucado

-----Original Message-----
From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org
[mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Steve P. Deeley
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 9:24 AM
To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] nfb v. target

That should not result in you receiving damages of almost $4,000.00.
----- Original Message -----
From: <ckrugman at sbcglobal.net>
To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 4:35 AM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] nfb v. target


As an individual I am insulted and damaged each time I am
discriminated by a
business not accommodating my ability to access their products
and services,
especially on the Internet when I have made sure that I have
accommodated
myself with the most up-to-date software to mitigate my needs as a blind
person. I should not have to rely on sighted assistance to use
a product or
do without because the greedy corporations has chosen the most expedient
road to sell their products. I am also insulted that you are
posting this
question. I have in my life time been sold out by too many
blind people that
thought they knew what I needed and I hope more companies will
have to pay
damages in these types of cases. Perhaps they will then learn
how to meet
the needs of all their customers. Fortunately here in California we have
some laws with some teeth in them that are
enforceable--although these teeth
still need a good sharpening.
Chuck
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve P. Deeley" <stevep.deeley at insightbb.com>
To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 6:22 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] nfb v. target


That is a lawyer talking who makes his living in rediculous
situations like
this one.  Again, you show me how an individual was damaged and out
$4,000.00.
Steve
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott C. LaBarre" <slabarre at labarrelaw.com>
To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 5:38 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] nfb v. target


Violation of civil rights has long been recognized as a form of
compensible
legal damage as well it should be.
Scott C. LaBarre, Esq.

LaBarre Law Offices P.C.
1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918
Denver, Colorado 80222
303 504-5979 (voice)
303 757-3640 (fax)
slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail)
www.labarrelaw.com (website)

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential
and privileged
information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not read,
copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message in
error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or
slabarre at labarrelaw.com,
and destroy and delete it from your system. This message and
any attachments
are covered by the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve P. Deeley" <stevep.deeley at insightbb.com>
To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: [blindlaw] nfb v. target


> This is ridiculous!  How were these people damaged?
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Mehgan Sidhu" <ms at browngold.com>
> To: <blindlaw at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 3:20 PM
> Subject: [blindlaw] nfb v. target
>
>
>> To answer the recent questions posted about the Target case,
the final
>> settlement hearing took place on March 9th.  I understand from our
>> counsel in California, Larry Paradis of DRA and Josh
Konecky, that there
>> were no objectors and the Judge was pleased with the
resolution of the
>> case.   The settlement is not fully "final" until the time for any
>> appeals has run - which is about 30 days.  Given there were
no objectors,
>> it is highly unlikely that any appeals will be filed.  The
judge has not
>> yet made a ruling on attorneys fees, but that will not hold up
>> enforcement of the settlement.
>>
>>
>>
>> As for disbursements, assuming there are no appeals, the claims
>> administer has 45 days from the final approval date to
disburse funds to
>> claimants. I do not know the final tally of approved
claimants, though I
>> think there were several hundred.  I will pass that information along
>> when I have it.
>>
>>
>>
>> We will now be working on enforcing the settlement commitments that
>> Target made with respect to the accessibility of the website.
>>
>>
>> Mehgan Sidhu
>> Brown, Goldstein & Levy, LLP
>> 120 East Baltimore Street, Suite 1700
>> Baltimore, Maryland 21202
>> 410-962-1030 x1324
>> 410-385-0869 (fax)
>> ms at browngold.com<mailto:ms at browngold.com>
>> www.browngold.com<http://www.browngold.com/>
>>
>> Confidentiality Notice
>>
>> This e-mail may contain confidential information that may
also be legally
>> privileged and that is intended only for the use of the addressee(s)
>> named above.  If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized
>> agent of the recipient, please be advised that any dissemination or
>> copying of this e-mail, or taking of any action in reliance on the
>> information contained herein, is strictly prohibited.  If you have
>> received this e-mail in error, please notify me immediately
by use of the
>> reply button, and then delete the e-mail from your system.
Thank you!
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindlaw mailing list
>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindlaw:
>>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stevep
.deeley%40insightbb.com
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.13/1999 - Release
Date: 03/13/09
> 05:59:00
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blindlaw mailing list
> blindlaw at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindlaw:
>
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/slabar
re%40labarrelaw.com
>



_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stevep
.deeley%40insightbb.com


----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.13/1999 - Release
Date: 03/13/09
05:59:00


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugm
an%40sbcglobal.net


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
blindlaw:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stevep
.deeley%40insightbb.com


----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.13/1999 - Release
Date: 03/13/09
05:59:00


_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
info for blindlaw:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jsoroz
co%40gmail.com


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
virus signature database 3936 (20090313) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com



__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 3936 (20090313) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com



_______________________________________________
blindlaw mailing list
blindlaw at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
blindlaw:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/slabarre%40labarrelaw.com






More information about the BlindLaw mailing list