A new class action lawsuit claims that a major online retailer’s website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals, raising questions about digital accessibility for people with disabilities. The complaint was filed by Livingston Bennett on March 11, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Slashop, Inc.
According to the filing, Bennett brings this action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated who are legally blind or visually impaired. The complaint states that Bennett requires screen-reading software to access website content but was unable to independently use or complete a purchase on https://slashop.com due to what he describes as significant access barriers. These alleged barriers include lack of alternative text for images, ambiguous link texts, inaccessible forms, and requirements that transactions be completed solely with a mouse rather than through keyboard navigation.
The lawsuit outlines that Slashop, Inc.’s website offers a range of pet-friendly home fabrics and bedding products such as sheets sets, duvet covers, comforters, pillows, blankets, sofa covers, and other home textiles. Bennett claims that while sighted customers can browse and make purchases without assistance, visually impaired users like himself are excluded from fully participating in these services due to inaccessible web design. The complaint asserts: “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.”
Bennett describes his own experience attempting to purchase a duvet cover from Slashop.com on October 27, 2025. He reports encountering multiple accessibility issues while using JAWS screen-reader software. These included images without alternative text descriptions; product links with unclear destinations; interactive elements that did not announce their state; pop-up windows without warning; color and size selection controls that did not indicate whether they were selected; and required use of a mouse for completing transactions—an activity he says is impossible for those relying solely on keyboard navigation.
The complaint references guidelines established by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), specifically WCAG 2.2 standards for web accessibility. It argues that these guidelines are widely recognized as best practices for making websites usable by people with disabilities and have been adopted by many large businesses and government agencies. According to Bennett’s legal team: “Incorporating the basic components to make their website accessible would neither fundamentally alter the nature of Defendant’s business nor result in an undue burden.”
The legal basis for the suit centers on 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 private businesses. The complaint alleges that Slashop.com qualifies as such a place under federal law but fails to provide equal access or reasonable modifications necessary for independent use by blind or visually impaired consumers.
Bennett seeks certification of a nationwide class consisting of all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access Slashop.com during the relevant statutory period but were denied full enjoyment of its goods or services due to alleged accessibility barriers. The requested remedies include both preliminary and permanent injunctions requiring Slashop, Inc. to bring its website into compliance with ADA standards; declaratory relief confirming that current practices violate disability rights laws; compensatory damages for affected class members; pre- and post-judgment interest; costs; attorneys’ fees; expert fees; and any further relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case is being handled by Equal Access Law Group PLLC with attorney Michael Ohrenberger representing Bennett and potential class members. The case number is 1:26-cv-2742.
Source: 126cv02742_Livingston_Bennett_v_Slashop_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf
