Plaintiff
- Name: Zachary Morris
- Filing Date: March 29, 2026
- Court: United States District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin
- State: Wisconsin
- Attorney Firm: Stein Saks, PLLC
Defendant
- Name: Revival Rugs, Inc.
- Website: www.revivalrugs.com
- Industry: Retailing
- Standards Cited: WCAG 2.1
- Summary: Offers a range of rugs in different styles, materials, and constructions, including washable designs and vintage-inspired pieces, with an emphasis on sustainable practices and direct-to-consumer availability.
Case Summary
According to the complaint, plaintiff Zachary Morris, a visually impaired individual, alleges that Revival Rugs, Inc. has failed to make its website, www.revivalrugs.com, accessible to blind users, violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Morris claims he encountered multiple barriers while attempting to purchase a washable rug, which prevented him from accessing the website's goods and services. He seeks a permanent injunction requiring the defendant to comply with accessibility standards and to implement changes to ensure equal access for visually impaired consumers. The complaint also seeks class certification for all legally blind individuals who have faced similar issues with the website.
Causes of Action
- Violations of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12182 et seq.
- Declaratory Relief
Key Allegations
- Defendant's website is not accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
- Plaintiff encountered barriers that denied full access to the website.
- Defendant failed to comply with WCAG 2.1 guidelines.
Requested Relief
- A preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the ADA.
- An order requiring Defendant to make its website fully compliant with the ADA.
- A declaration that Defendant's website discriminates against the blind.
Proposed Class
All legally blind individuals in the United States who have attempted to access Defendant’s Website and as a result have been denied access to the equal enjoyment of goods and services, during the relevant statutory period.
Jurisdiction & Venue
This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 42 U.S.C. § 12182; venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b)(1) and (2).
