Live Webcast/Rebroadcast – You watch the course online at the specified date and time shown below. You can ask questions and receive answers during the course.
On-Demand – You watch the course anytime and will have access to the course 24/7. Our On-Demand courses are available within 5-10 business days after the original recording and accessible for one year.
This program was recorded on December 10, 2020
In late 2015 what seemed to be nothing but a theory that websites should be accessible to those with disabilities turned into a storm of litigation, with cases rising from a few dozen in 2015 to thousands by 2019. Defendants tried one defense after another, usually without success. Businesses hoping to avoid litigation found that there was little clear guidance and a great deal of misinformation about what it means to have an accessible website. Five years after the storm broke, the legal theory of website accessibility remains uncertain, but the practical steps required both to avoid and defend litigation are clear. This webinar will give participants the historical and theoretical background necessary to understand website accessibility claims and practical guidance for avoiding and defending claims under the ADA and related statutes.
Richard M. Hunt
Richard is a Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer with thirty-seven years of experience representing businesses and individuals in litigation, arbitration, and mediation. He has served as an adjunct professor teaching Disability Law at the Dedman School of Law at Southern Methodist University and has served on the Examination Committee for Civil Trial Certification for the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and as an adjunct professor of trial advocacy at Texas Wesleyan School of Law. Richard is the author of Accessibility Defense (accessdefense.com), a blog for businesses that focuses on avoiding and defending lawsuits brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Fair Housing Act. Richard frequently speaks on ADA and FHA issues and presents webinars of these and other topics. He has been interviewed by The Economist and Forbes, among other publications, on issues related to ADA and FHA litigation.
2 General Credits
ProLawCLE will seek approval of any CLE program where the registering attorney is primarily licensed with exceptions stated below. Application is made at the time an attorney registers for a course, therefore approval may not be received at the time of broadcasting.
ProLawCLE does not seek approval in the state of Virginia.
Each state has its own governing rules and regulations with regards to CLE courses and formats, therefore please contact your state MCLE regulatory entity for further details about your state's rules. Please visit our State Requirements page for information regarding your state's CLE requirements and/or contact information for your state bar.
As stated in our Reciprocity Provision, ProLawCLE will grant credit in the following states through reciprocity, therefore direct application will not be made in these states:
AK, AR, AZ, CA, CT, DE, DC, FL, HI, MA, MD, ME, MI, MO, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, SD, PR.
The following states are self apply. The attorney can apply for credit at no cost. We will provide documentation for them to apply:
CO, IA, NE
OH Attorneys please note: OH Supreme Court will not approve any course that was aired more than 12 months prior.
SC Attorneys please note: Registration must occur no later than 5 business days from the event date or course accreditation is not guaranteed.
ProLawCLE is dedicated to providing quality education from expert speakers and ensuring each attorney receives CLE credit for their participation. If for some reason a particular course does not receive approval in the attorney's primary state of licensure, ProLawCLE will give credit for a future approved course or give a full refund, if applicable.
Each On-Demand course is available to you for 1 year from date of purchase. Additionally, CLE credit is only available within that year.
Read our full Reciprocity Provision here
1) Understanding the website experience of disabled users.
2) Technical versus practical definitions of “accessible” for websites.
3) The origins and history of website litigation and the development of a theoretical basis for website accessibility claims.
4) A survey of theories of website accessibility as adopted by different courts.
5) A survey of common defenses to website accessibility lawsuits
6) Who can be sued for an inaccessible website
7) What to do when your client is sued; avoiding fake solutions and money wasting legal strategies.