California’s Unruh Act and Website Accessibility

Look at where website accessibility lawsuits are filed and California stands out, though not in the way you might expect. Seyfarth Shaw counted only four federal website accessibility lawsuits in California in 2025, compared with 1,021 in New York and 961 in Florida. Yet California businesses are anything but safe. The reason is a state law that turns an inaccessible website into a claim for money: the Unruh Civil Rights Act.

This guide explains how the law works, why it has become so important for websites, and what recent California cases show. It is general information, not legal advice; talk to your attorney about your own situation.

What the Unruh Act covers

The Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code section 51, entitles everyone in California to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges and services in “business establishments of every kind whatsoever.” Disability is among the protected characteristics.

The provision that matters most for websites is section 51(f). It says a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act is also a violation of the Unruh Act. So if a business website violates the ADA, a California plaintiff can bring an Unruh claim too, and that changes the financial stakes dramatically.

Why the damages matter

Under the federal ADA, a private plaintiff can win an injunction ordering the business to fix its site, plus attorney’s fees, but no money damages. The Unruh Act adds them. Under Civil Code section 52(a), a business that violates the Act is liable for actual damages and up to three times that amount, but “in no case less than four thousand dollars ($4,000)” for each offense, plus attorney’s fees.

That $4,000 minimum per violation is why so many California website claims are filed in state court, and why they don’t show up in federal lawsuit counts.

What recent cases show

California courts have shaped how the Unruh Act applies to websites through a handful of important decisions.

Robles v. Domino’s Pizza

Guillermo Robles, who is blind, couldn’t order from Domino’s website or app with his screen reader. In January 2019 the Ninth Circuit held that the ADA applied because the website and app connected customers to Domino’s physical restaurants, and the Supreme Court declined to hear the case that October. In 2021 the trial court granted summary judgment to Robles, awarding $4,000 in Unruh damages and ordering Domino’s to make its site conform to WCAG. The parties settled in 2022 on undisclosed terms.

Thurston v. Omni Hotels

Defendants do win. In 2021 a California appeals court affirmed a jury verdict for Omni Hotels, holding that a plaintiff must have visited the website with a genuine intent to use the business’s services, not only to test it for violations.

Martinez v. Cot’n Wash

In August 2022 a California appeals court held that a retailer operating only online, with no physical location, is not a place of public accommodation under the ADA. The Unruh claim based on an ADA violation therefore failed, and a standalone Unruh claim required showing intentional discrimination.

Alcazar v. Fashion Nova

This class action produced a proposed $5.15 million settlement that would pay up to $4,000 per eligible California claimant, with about $2.5 million requested for attorney’s fees. In February 2026 the Department of Justice filed a statement of interest opposing the settlement. As of this writing, we have not seen a final approval ruling.

What businesses should do

The legal details are complicated, but the practical response is not. Audit your website against WCAG 2.1 Level AA, paying particular attention to forms, checkout, booking and documents. Fix the barriers on those key journeys first, then work through the rest in a documented plan. Publish an accurate accessibility statement with a working contact method, and keep records of your audits, fixes and retesting. If a demand letter or complaint arrives, call your attorney before responding.

If you use an accessibility widget such as accessiBe, as we do, treat it as a layer on top of these fixes rather than a replacement for them. A widget gives visitors helpful controls, but courts look at whether the website itself works.

Reduce your exposure

EVERNET’s website accessibility audits and remediation give you a prioritized plan and documentation of your effort. For the national picture, including penalties and other recent cases, read ADA website requirements and recent lawsuits.