Plaintiff
- Name: Zachary Morris
- Filing Date: March 4, 2026
- Court: United States District Court Eastern District of Wisconsin
- State: Wisconsin
- Attorney Firm: Stein Saks, PLLC
Defendant
- Name: Solgaard Design, Inc.
- Website: www.solgaard.co
- Industry: Retailing
- Standards Cited: WCAG 2.1
- Summary: Retailer specializing in sustainable travel products, including luggage, backpacks, briefcases, and accessories, made from recycled and ocean-bound plastics.
Case Summary
According to the complaint, Plaintiff Zachary Morris, a visually-impaired individual, is suing Solgaard Design, Inc. for failing to make its website, www.solgaard.co, accessible under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The complaint alleges that the website contains numerous barriers that prevent blind users from accessing its goods and services, including missing alt-text and broken links. Morris seeks a permanent injunction requiring the company to comply with accessibility standards and to implement changes to ensure equal access for visually-impaired consumers. He also requests damages and legal fees.
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 him full access to the website.
- Defendant failed to comply with WCAG 2.1 guidelines.
Requested Relief
- Preliminary and permanent injunction to prohibit Defendant from violating the ADA.
- Injunction requiring Defendant to make its website fully compliant with the ADA.
- Declaration that Defendant's website discriminates against the blind.
- Order certifying the Class and appointing Plaintiff as Class Representative.
- Payment of nominal damages.
- Pre- and post-judgment interest.
- Award of costs and expenses of this action together with reasonable attorneys’ and expert fees.
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).

