National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that ADA plaintiffs must “allege that there is a ‘nexus’ between the challenged service and the place of public accommodation,” i.e., “a physical place”
• holding that ADA plaintiffs must “allege that there is a ‘nexus’ between the challenged service and the place of public accommodation,” i.e., “a physical place”
• noting that the purpose of the statute is to bar actions or omissions which impair a disabled person's \full enjoyment\ of the services or goods of a covered accommodation
• distinguishing actionable website functionality that impedes equal access to goods and 9 services offered in Target stores from non-actionable website functionality that does not affect 10 equal access to goods and services offered in Target stores
• “[E]ven if [defendant] chooses to change its entire website in order to comply with California law, this does not mean that California is regulating out-of-state conduct.”
• “[D]efendant concludes that Target need not 23 Amended Compl. (doc. no. 19) ¶¶ 58, 58(d

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).