Quantcast

Visually Impaired Plaintiff Alleges Online Accessibility Violations Against Popular Coffee Retailer

COOK COUNTY RECORD

Wednesday, December 25, 2024

Visually Impaired Plaintiff Alleges Online Accessibility Violations Against Popular Coffee Retailer

Federal Court

A lawsuit has been filed against a prominent coffee company for failing to make its digital properties accessible to visually impaired individuals. Chris Jackson, the plaintiff, lodged the complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on September 23, 2024, targeting Schuil Coffee Company, LLC, doing business as Sparrows Coffee & Tea.

The case revolves around allegations that Sparrows Coffee & Tea's digital platform is not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), specifically Title III which mandates effective communication and equal access for individuals with disabilities. Jackson, who is legally blind due to glaucoma and relies on screen-reader technology to navigate online platforms, claims that he was unable to access essential features of the company's website. This lack of accessibility prevented him from purchasing products such as 'All Seasons Blend' and 'H.O.M.E.S. Blend', thus denying him equal access to services readily available to sighted customers.

Jackson argues that Sparrows Coffee & Tea's failure to ensure their digital content is compatible with screen-reading software constitutes a violation of ADA regulations. The Department of Justice has long held that ADA requirements extend to web-based services offered by public accommodations. In support of his claim, Jackson highlights specific barriers encountered on the website—such as non-descriptive labels on interactive elements and inaccessible error messages—which hinder screen-reader users from successfully navigating and utilizing the site.

The plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction requiring Sparrows Coffee & Tea to overhaul its digital platform policies and practices. This includes hiring a web accessibility consultant, conducting regular audits and user testing by individuals with visual impairments, providing ongoing staff training on web accessibility, and implementing feedback mechanisms for continuous improvement. Additionally, Jackson requests declaratory judgment acknowledging the defendant's non-compliance at the time of filing, payment of legal costs including attorney fees for monitoring compliance post-judgment, nominal damages, and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.

Representing Chris Jackson are attorneys Benjamin J. Sweet and Jonathan D. Miller from Nye Stirling Hale Miller & Sweet LLP. The case is identified under Civil Action No. 1:24-cv-8787 in front of an unspecified judge at this stage.

More News