A lawsuit claims that a major online retailer’s website excludes blind and visually impaired consumers from independently purchasing products, raising concerns about digital accessibility for people with disabilities. The complaint was filed by Livingston Bennett on March 27, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against D11961 Premium Denim Inc.
According to the filing, Bennett is legally blind and requires screen-reading software to access online content. He brings this action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, alleging that D11961 Premium Denim Inc.’s website (https://dl11961.com) is not designed or maintained to be accessible to individuals who are blind or visually impaired. The complaint states that “Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired individuals throughout the United States equal access to the goods and services Defendant provides to their non-disabled customers through the Website.”
The lawsuit outlines that approximately 8.1 million people in the United States are visually impaired, including 2 million who are blind, citing reports from the U.S. Census Bureau and American Foundation for the Blind. In Illinois alone, it is estimated that around 260,000 individuals are visually impaired. The complaint emphasizes that many people with visual impairments rely heavily on online platforms due to mobility barriers but face exclusion when websites lack proper accessibility features.
Bennett alleges that despite technological advances and widely available solutions—such as alternative text for images, accessible forms, descriptive links, resizable text, and keyboard navigation—the defendant’s website relies exclusively on a visual interface without meaningful accommodations for screen-reader users. As a result, he claims that “visually impaired individuals must rely on sighted companions to assist them in accessing and purchasing on the Website,” which he argues constitutes discrimination under both state law and federal law including Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The complaint details specific barriers encountered by Bennett while attempting to shop for jeans on January 20, 2026. These included ambiguous link texts; sub-menu elements inaccessible via keyboard; misimplemented ‘Skip to content’ links; images lacking descriptive alternative text; non-interactive phone numbers; pop-up windows without appropriate notifications; interactive elements without clear names or roles; unannounced selection states for size options; search suggestions not communicated via screen reader; and non-interactive elements marked as focusable. According to Bennett’s experience: “Plaintiff could not learn more detailed information about the product and its features,” “Plaintiff did not know about the interactive element from the page,” and “Plaintiff was disoriented when the automatic pop-up window appeared.”
Bennett further alleges that these design flaws force visually impaired customers either to seek assistance from others or resort to brick-and-mortar stores at additional inconvenience or cost. He contends that making websites accessible would neither fundamentally alter business operations nor create an undue burden for companies like D11961 Premium Denim Inc., referencing established guidelines such as those published by the World Wide Web Consortium (WCAG 2.2) and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act.
The lawsuit seeks several remedies: a preliminary and permanent injunction requiring D11961 Premium Denim Inc. to make its website fully accessible under ADA standards; compensatory damages for affected class members who have experienced discrimination; declaratory relief confirming that current practices violate federal law; pre- and post-judgment interest; reasonable attorneys’ fees; costs of litigation; class certification for all legally blind individuals in the United States denied access during the relevant statutory period; appointment of Bennett as Class Representative; appointment of his attorneys as Class Counsel; as well as any other relief deemed just by the court.
Bennett asserts ongoing harm unless corrective action is taken: “Unless Defendant remedies the numerous access barriers on its Website, Bennett and Class Members will continue to be unable to independently navigate, browse, use, and complete a purchase on the Website.” He also expresses intent to return immediately if accessibility issues are resolved.
The case was filed by attorney Michael Ohrenberger of Equal Access Law Group PLLC based in Flushing, New York. The case number is 1:26-cv-3418.
Source: 126cv03418_Livingston_Bennett_v_d11961_PremiumComplaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf
