From the defendant's motion for judgement[1]: The viability of Gil's claim hangs on the single legal determination: whether Winn-Dixie's website is a place of p

From the defendant's motion for judgement[1]: The viability of Gil's claim hangs on the single legal determination: whether Winn-Dixie's website is a place of public accommodation that is subject to the ADA. Only from this determination does everything else follow. Citing the list of issues remaining to be determined from opinion, verdict and order[2]: (2) and (3) are contextually relevant questions iff (1) was judged in the affirmative. > And yes, you really do have to go out of your way to build something a modern screen reader can't handle. On this note, I suppose we simply agree to disagree. [1] http://www.adatitleiii.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/121/2016/12/Motion-for-Jugdment.pdf http://www.adatitleiii.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/121/2016... [2] https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/3067htvmz/florida-southern-district-court/gil-v-winn-dixie-stores-inc/ https://www.plainsite.org/dockets/3067htvmz/florida-southern...