ADA Laws in North Carolina

ADA laws in North Carolina: how the rules apply to websites and digital services

North Carolina businesses have been dealing with accessibility lawsuits for more than a decade. Most of those cases trace back to one federal law: the Americans with Disabilities Act. The statute itself dates to 1990. The legal fights about websites came much later.

Here’s the basic issue. The ADA requires businesses that serve the public to make their services accessible to people with disabilities. Courts now regularly apply that rule to websites, online appointment systems, PDFs, and mobile apps.

North Carolina doesn’t have a separate state website accessibility statute that replaces the ADA. Instead, lawsuits usually rely on Title III of the ADA, sometimes paired with the North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act. That combination has been used against retailers, medical offices, hotels, restaurants, and universities operating in the state.

The result is a steady stream of demand letters and federal lawsuits. Many involve the same technical barriers: missing alt text, broken form labels, inaccessible PDFs, and checkout flows that don’t work with screen readers.

This article breaks down how the law actually works in North Carolina. No marketing language. Just what the courts say, how lawsuits happen, and what businesses usually get wrong.

the federal law that drives most accessibility lawsuits

The ADA is a federal civil rights law passed in 1990. It prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, government services, transportation, and public accommodations.

Website cases almost always rely on Title III.

Title III applies to businesses that are considered “places of public accommodation.” The law lists twelve categories, including:

• restaurants
• hotels
• theaters
• retail stores
• banks
• healthcare providers
• professional offices
• recreation facilities
• private schools
• service establishments

If a business falls into one of those categories, it must provide equal access to its services.

Originally that meant physical accessibility. Wheelchair ramps. Accessible restrooms. Proper signage.

Courts now often treat websites as part of that access.

A simple example makes the issue clear.

A restaurant in Raleigh allows customers to order takeout through its website. The ordering form lacks proper labels, so screen reader software can’t identify the fields. A blind user can’t place an order.

Under Title III, that situation can qualify as discrimination.

The legal theory is straightforward: the website blocks access to the same service available to other customers.

why website lawsuits increased after 2015

Website accessibility cases were rare before 2015. They exist earlier, but the numbers were small.

Two developments changed that.

First, more services moved online. Appointment scheduling, retail checkout, food ordering, patient portals. When those systems break for assistive technology, the barriers are obvious.

Second, federal courts began accepting ADA claims tied to websites.

One appellate decision pushed the issue forward: Robles v. Domino’s Pizza in 2019. The Ninth Circuit ruled that Domino’s website and app had to be accessible because they connected to the company’s physical restaurants.

That case wasn’t in North Carolina. But its reasoning spread.

Federal courts across the country began allowing similar lawsuits to proceed. North Carolina federal courts followed the same pattern.

the courts that handle north carolina accessibility lawsuits

North Carolina sits inside the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. That circuit includes:

• North Carolina
• South Carolina
• Virginia
• West Virginia
• Maryland

Federal website accessibility cases filed in North Carolina typically start in one of three district courts:

• Western District of North Carolina (Charlotte)
• Middle District of North Carolina (Greensboro)
• Eastern District of North Carolina (Raleigh)

The Fourth Circuit hasn’t issued a sweeping ruling saying all websites must be accessible. Courts inside the circuit still allow many ADA website cases to proceed.

Most judges focus on a practical question:

Does the website connect to a physical business location?

If the answer is yes, lawsuits are more likely to survive early dismissal attempts.

the north carolina disability law that sometimes appears in lawsuits

Plaintiffs sometimes add a second claim under state law: the North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act (NCPDPA).

The statute was enacted in 1985 and is codified in N.C. General Statutes Chapter 168A.

The law prohibits discrimination against people with disabilities in several areas:

• employment
• housing
• public accommodations

Its language closely mirrors the ADA.

Many accessibility lawsuits include both claims:

• ADA Title III
• North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act

The ADA allows injunctive relief. That means a court order requiring the business to fix the problem.

The state law can sometimes open the door to damages, depending on the claim and procedural posture.

what plaintiffs typically claim in website accessibility cases

Most complaints follow the same structure.

A visually impaired plaintiff uses a screen reader such as JAWS, NVDA, or VoiceOver. The software reads webpage content aloud. The user attempts to perform a task. Something breaks.

The lawsuit then lists the technical barriers.

Common allegations include:

missing alternative text
images that contain text but no description
form fields without labels
navigation menus that can’t be reached by keyboard
PDF files that are not tagged for screen readers
low color contrast
links that make no sense out of context
buttons with no accessible name

Many complaints also cite the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). These guidelines were developed by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).

WCAG 2.1 Level AA is the standard most often referenced in settlements.

Important detail: WCAG is not written into the ADA statute. Courts use it as a benchmark because it’s widely recognized and technically detailed.

an example from a north carolina accessibility lawsuit

A 2021 federal lawsuit filed in the Western District of North Carolina involved a regional retailer.

The plaintiff was a blind customer using the JAWS screen reader.

According to the complaint, the retailer’s website allowed customers to browse products and schedule in-store pickup. The system relied on visual dropdown menus that didn’t respond to keyboard navigation.

The plaintiff alleged that he attempted to order several items but couldn’t complete the checkout process.

The lawsuit claimed violations of:

• ADA Title III
• North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act

Within several months, the case settled. The settlement terms were not publicly disclosed, but the retailer agreed to implement WCAG-based accessibility improvements and periodic testing.

This pattern is typical. Most website accessibility cases settle before trial.

why small businesses receive demand letters

Large companies attract media coverage when they’re sued. In practice, many accessibility claims target smaller businesses.

Several factors explain that.

First, smaller companies often run older websites built without accessibility testing.

Second, small businesses frequently upload documents such as menus, brochures, or intake forms as PDFs. Many of those files aren’t tagged for screen readers.

Third, automated testing tools make it easy to identify problems.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys often run scans across thousands of websites. When the software finds accessibility errors, the site can become a potential lawsuit target.

A typical demand letter describes several violations and asks the business to negotiate a settlement.

Settlement amounts vary widely. Some resolve for a few thousand dollars plus remediation costs. Others exceed $20,000 when legal fees accumulate.

healthcare providers in north carolina face frequent accessibility claims

Medical offices are a recurring target.

Doctors’ websites often contain several high-risk features:

• online appointment scheduling
• patient intake forms
• medical history PDFs
• insurance verification portals

When those features aren’t accessible, patients with disabilities may have no practical way to schedule care.

Courts have generally been receptive to ADA claims against healthcare providers because the services are essential.

Dental practices and urgent care clinics appear regularly in demand letters.

A common scenario involves an online appointment form that screen readers can’t interpret.

The form may contain placeholder text but no programmatic labels. Screen reader software then reads the field as “edit blank,” giving the user no clue what information belongs there.

restaurants and food ordering systems are another frequent target

Restaurants in North Carolina increasingly rely on digital ordering.

Many use third-party platforms. Others run their own ordering systems.

Accessibility issues show up in several places:

menu images without text descriptions
checkout pages that require mouse interaction
payment forms with missing labels
promo popups that trap keyboard navigation

When a customer cannot place an order online but others can, the barrier becomes the basis for an ADA claim.

Delivery apps sometimes complicate the situation. A restaurant might rely on a platform it doesn’t fully control. Courts still tend to focus on whether the restaurant offers accessible ordering options.

the technical standards businesses usually follow

The ADA itself doesn’t contain detailed website requirements.

That gap leaves businesses asking a simple question: what standard actually applies?

Most accessibility settlements and consent decrees point to WCAG 2.1 Level AA.

WCAG organizes accessibility requirements around four principles:

perceivable
operable
understandable
robust

Each principle contains technical success criteria.

Examples include:

text alternatives for images
keyboard accessibility
consistent navigation
proper HTML structure
accessible form labels
error identification in forms

Developers implement these requirements through semantic HTML, ARIA attributes, proper heading structure, and color contrast guidelines.

the limitations of automated accessibility testing

Automated tools are useful but incomplete.

Programs such as WAVE, axe, and Lighthouse scan pages for technical violations. They identify missing alt text, color contrast issues, and structural errors.

Those scans catch only part of the problem.

Many accessibility issues require manual testing.

Example:

A website may include alt text on images. The automated tool passes the page. But the alt text might read “image123.” That technically satisfies the rule but still fails the user.

Manual testing with screen readers reveals the issue.

Keyboard navigation testing is also essential. Many interactive elements work with a mouse but fail with keyboard-only navigation.

the cost of fixing accessibility problems

Costs vary depending on the site.

Small websites sometimes require modest adjustments. A developer may need to add form labels, restructure headings, and improve color contrast.

More complex systems take longer.

E-commerce sites often require code changes across dozens of templates. Product galleries, filters, checkout pages, and account dashboards all need testing.

Accessibility remediation projects for mid-size sites often fall between $5,000 and $30,000 depending on complexity.

Large enterprise platforms can exceed $100,000 if redesigns are necessary.

Those numbers explain why many businesses settle early when lawsuits appear.

the debate over ADA website lawsuits

The rise in lawsuits has sparked criticism.

Business groups argue that many cases function as “drive-by” litigation. Plaintiffs or attorneys scan websites, identify errors, and file suits quickly.

Critics say businesses often receive little warning before legal action.

Disability advocates see the issue differently.

They argue that online access has become essential for daily life. Banking, healthcare, retail purchases, and government services all operate online.

When those systems exclude disabled users, the barrier is not theoretical. It’s practical.

Courts generally avoid debating policy questions. They focus on whether the law prohibits unequal access.

the role of the department of justice

The U.S. Department of Justice enforces the ADA.

For years, the agency signaled that website accessibility regulations were coming. Draft rules circulated during the Obama administration.

Those regulations never became final.

Even without formal rules, the Department of Justice has repeatedly stated that the ADA applies to websites offering public services.

In 2022, the agency issued guidance explaining that businesses should make their websites accessible and referenced WCAG as a helpful framework.

The guidance doesn’t carry the same legal weight as formal regulations. Courts still cite it when analyzing ADA website cases.

public universities and accessibility requirements

Public universities in North Carolina face additional legal obligations.

Two federal laws apply:

• the Americans with Disabilities Act
• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

Section 504 requires accessibility for programs receiving federal funding.

Universities frequently publish accessibility policies referencing WCAG 2.1.

Large schools also maintain digital accessibility offices that review websites and course materials.

Even with those policies, accessibility complaints still appear. University systems host thousands of pages, documents, and learning tools.

Maintaining accessibility across that scale is difficult.

government websites follow stricter standards

State and local government agencies in North Carolina fall under Title II of the ADA.

Title II applies to public entities.

Government websites must provide equal access to services such as:

tax payments
permit applications
public records requests
voter information
online court forms

Accessibility failures can prevent residents from completing essential tasks.

Many government accessibility settlements require agencies to adopt WCAG standards and conduct ongoing testing.

a common mistake: inaccessible PDFs

PDF files cause more accessibility complaints than many businesses expect.

Restaurants upload menus as scanned images. Medical offices post patient forms as image-based PDFs. Real estate listings often use the same approach.

Screen readers cannot interpret image-based text.

Accessible PDFs require tagging, logical reading order, and text alternatives for images.

Fixing those files often means rebuilding them from the original source document.

the impact of mobile apps

Mobile apps increasingly appear in ADA complaints.

Retailers, banks, and restaurants encourage customers to use mobile apps for ordering, payments, or loyalty programs.

When those apps contain accessibility barriers, the legal analysis mirrors website cases.

Developers must consider features such as:

screen reader compatibility
accessible gestures
voice control support
scalable text
proper labeling of interactive elements

Both Apple VoiceOver and Android TalkBack expose accessibility problems quickly during testing.

how businesses reduce legal risk

Many companies now adopt structured accessibility programs.

These programs usually include several components:

accessibility audits
remediation work by developers
screen reader testing
accessibility statements on the website
staff training for content editors

Accessibility statements often provide a contact email or phone number where users can report barriers.

That doesn’t eliminate liability, but it shows a documented effort to improve access.

why accessibility improvements benefit more than lawsuits

Accessibility work often improves usability for everyone.

Clear headings help screen readers but also improve search engine indexing.

Captioned videos assist deaf users but also help viewers in noisy environments.

Keyboard navigation benefits users with mobility impairments and people using laptops without a mouse.

Some companies first approach accessibility as legal compliance and later notice these usability gains.

north carolina businesses that face the most accessibility claims

Certain industries appear frequently in federal complaints:

dentists
urgent care clinics
dermatology practices
restaurants
hotel chains
auto dealerships
regional retail stores

These industries share two traits: high consumer traffic and service booking systems.

When those systems break for assistive technology, plaintiffs have clear evidence of unequal access.

a brief look at real numbers

Website accessibility litigation has grown steadily.

According to data compiled by UsableNet, federal website accessibility lawsuits in the United States reached:

• about 814 cases in 2017
• 2,285 cases in 2018
• 3,550 cases in 2020
• over 4,000 cases in 2023

Not all of those occurred in North Carolina. The state still sees regular filings each year.

Demand letters, which are harder to track, likely occur at much higher rates.

the limits of accessibility compliance

Even businesses that follow WCAG sometimes face complaints.

Several factors explain why.

First, accessibility guidelines evolve. WCAG 2.0 became WCAG 2.1 in 2018, and WCAG 2.2 followed in 2023.

Second, websites change constantly. New content, plugins, and updates can introduce errors.

Third, accessibility testing is complex. A site that works well with one screen reader may behave differently with another.

For that reason, accessibility programs focus on ongoing monitoring rather than one-time fixes.

how courts evaluate accessibility claims

Judges typically examine several factors when reviewing ADA website complaints.

They look at whether the plaintiff attempted to use the website.

They review the alleged barriers and how those barriers prevent access to goods or services.

They consider whether the business operates physical locations connected to the website.

If those elements are present, the case often moves forward to settlement discussions.

Few cases reach trial because litigation costs rise quickly.

the practical reality for north carolina businesses

Businesses operating in North Carolina fall under federal ADA obligations whether or not the state passes additional website laws.

The pattern seen across the country also appears in the state:

demand letters arrive first
lawsuits follow when negotiations fail
cases settle before trial
settlements usually include WCAG-based remediation

Some companies treat accessibility only as legal compliance.

Others treat it as part of broader usability and digital quality.

Either way, the legal pressure has pushed accessibility from a niche technical topic into a routine part of website development.