A new lawsuit claims that a popular online retailer’s website denies blind and visually impaired customers equal access to goods and services, raising questions about digital accessibility standards for businesses serving the public. The complaint was filed by Martrell Desamonta Booker in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on March 27, 2026, naming Tipsy Elves LLC as the defendant.
According to the filing, Booker is legally blind and relies on screen-reading software to access online content. He alleges that Tipsy Elves’ website (https://www.tipsyelves.com/) contains significant barriers that prevent him and others who are visually impaired from independently navigating or making purchases. The complaint states, “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 how Booker attempted to purchase a shirt from Tipsy Elves’ website but encountered multiple obstacles that made it impossible for him to complete a transaction without assistance. Among the specific issues cited are inadequate alternative text for images, ambiguous link texts, inaccessible drop-down menus, interactive elements mislabeled or not keyboard-navigable, and pop-up windows that do not provide sufficient notification or context changes for screen-reader users. For example, when using JAWS screen-reader software, Booker found that “different images of the same product had similar and poorly descriptive alternative text,” making it difficult to understand product details.
Booker asserts that these design choices violate Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which prohibits discrimination based on disability in places of public accommodation. The complaint references guidance from both federal agencies and international standards organizations—such as version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)—that provide recommendations for making websites accessible. According to Booker’s attorneys, “incorporating basic components to make their website accessible would neither fundamentally alter the nature of Defendant’s business nor result in an undue burden.”
The suit further alleges that despite readily available technology and industry guidelines, Tipsy Elves has chosen not to implement necessary accommodations for screen-reader users. As a result, visually impaired individuals must rely on sighted companions or shop at physical stores instead of being able to browse and buy independently online—a situation described as discriminatory under both state and federal law.
Booker brings this case as a class action on behalf of all legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to use Tipsy Elves’ website during the relevant statutory period but were denied full enjoyment of its goods and services due to accessibility barriers. The complaint seeks certification of this nationwide class under Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
In terms of relief sought from the court, Booker requests both preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting Tipsy Elves from violating accessibility laws in Illinois and federally under ADA provisions. He also asks for an order requiring Tipsy Elves to bring its website into compliance with established accessibility standards so it becomes usable by visually impaired consumers. Additional remedies sought include declaratory judgment regarding discrimination allegations, certification of class status with appointment of Booker as representative plaintiff and his attorneys as class counsel, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs associated with litigation including attorney fees, expert fees, as well as any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case underscores ongoing legal debates over whether commercial websites qualify as places of public accommodation under ADA regulations—a position supported by recent guidance from the U.S. Department of Justice cited in Booker’s filing: “the Department has consistently taken the position that the ADA’s requirements apply to all…activities offered by public accommodations, including those offered on the web.”
Booker is represented by Alison Chan of Equal Access Law Group PLLC based in Brooklyn, New York. The case is identified as Case No.: 1:26-cv-3394.
Source: 126cv03394_Martrell_Desamonta_v_Tipsy_ElvesComplaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf
