A lawsuit claims that a major footwear and leather care retailer’s website denies equal access to blind and visually impaired customers, raising questions about compliance with federal disability law in online commerce. The complaint was filed by Nicole Davis on March 27, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Angelus Shoe Polish Co., Inc.
According to the filing, Davis is legally blind and relies on screen-reading software to access web content. She brings this case as a class action on behalf of herself and other similarly situated individuals who are visually impaired. The central allegation is that Angelus Shoe Polish Co.’s website, https://angelusdirect.com, is not designed or maintained to be accessible for people who use assistive technologies such as screen readers. As a result, Davis asserts that she and others have been denied full and equal access to goods and services offered through the company’s online platform.
The complaint outlines several specific barriers encountered by Davis while attempting to shop for shoe cleaner products on December 4, 2025. These include issues such as poorly descriptive alternative text for images, navigation menus that expand automatically without clear focus order, infinite scroll features that disorient users relying on keyboard navigation, non-interactive contact information like phone numbers and email addresses, pop-up windows without adequate notification or control for screen readers, and interactive elements that do not announce their state or allow keyboard-only operation. According to Davis, these obstacles made it impossible for her to independently complete a purchase or even browse products effectively.
Davis argues that these barriers violate Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities in places of public accommodation—including websites operated by businesses serving the public. The complaint cites guidance from the United States Department of Justice Civil Rights Division stating that ADA requirements apply to goods and services offered online by public accommodations.
The filing details how accessible technology exists—such as proper use of alternative text for images, accessible forms, descriptive links, resizable text options, keyboard navigability, and adherence to established guidelines like the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) version 2.2—but alleges that Angelus Shoe Polish Co. has not implemented these features despite their availability. “Defendant has chosen to rely on an exclusively visual interface that provides no meaningful accommodations for Screen-reader-users,” the complaint states.
Davis claims she attempted multiple times to use the website but was repeatedly deterred by these accessibility issues. She further alleges emotional distress resulting from being unable to participate equally in online shopping activities available to sighted customers: “Plaintiff suffers interference with daily activities, as well as emotional distress, including… humiliation, stress, anger, frustration…”
The suit seeks several forms of relief from the court: a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring Angelus Shoe Polish Co. to make its website fully accessible under ADA standards; a declaration that current practices discriminate against visually impaired users; certification of a nationwide class consisting of all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted but failed to access goods or services via the company’s website; compensatory damages; pre- and post-judgment interest; costs; attorneys’ fees; expert fees; and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Class certification is requested under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(2), arguing common questions exist regarding whether the defendant’s website constitutes a place of public accommodation under federal law and whether its current design denies equal enjoyment of goods or services based on disability status.
The plaintiff is represented by Alison Chan of Equal Access Law Group PLLC in Brooklyn, New York. The case number is 1:26-cv-3384.
Source: 126cv03384_Nicole_Davis_v_Angelus_ShoeComplaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf