A visually impaired consumer has filed a federal class action lawsuit seeking to compel an online retailer to make its website accessible to blind and visually impaired users, raising questions about digital inclusion and equal access under disability rights laws. The complaint was submitted by Carlton Knowles on March 24, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against Nester Hosiery, LLC, which operates the Farm to Feet retail website.
According to the filing, Knowles alleges that Nester Hosiery’s interactive website is not designed or maintained in a way that allows blind or visually impaired individuals using screen-reading software to independently access goods and services offered online. The suit claims this constitutes discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), as well as violations of New York State Human Rights Law (NYSHRL), New York City Human Rights Law (NYCHRL), and New York General Business Law Section 349.
The complaint outlines how Knowles, who is legally blind and relies on screen-reading technology such as Job Access With Speech (JAWS), attempted multiple times—including most recently on March 16, 2026—to purchase products from Farm to Feet’s website but was unable due to barriers like missing alternative text for images, broken links, redundant navigation elements, empty links without descriptive text, and other issues incompatible with assistive technology. As stated in the document: “Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers that denied Plaintiff a shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person and full and equal access to the goods and services offered.”
The legal arguments reference guidance from the U.S. Department of Justice confirming that public accommodations must ensure their websites are accessible under Title III of the ADA. The filing cites established standards such as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 as recognized benchmarks for digital accessibility. It also notes statistics indicating millions of Americans are visually impaired—including hundreds of thousands in New York—and asserts that inaccessible websites increase isolation among people with disabilities.
The plaintiff argues that despite widespread knowledge of accessibility requirements and available technical solutions—such as providing alternative text for images or ensuring keyboard navigation—Nester Hosiery failed to address these barriers. The complaint alleges intentional discrimination through policies or practices that exclude or deter blind consumers from accessing online goods and information: “Defendant uses standards, criteria or methods of administration that have the effect of discriminating or perpetuating the discrimination of others.”
Knowles seeks both individual relief and certification of nationwide classes representing all legally blind individuals who have been denied equal enjoyment of goods or services through Nester Hosiery’s website during relevant periods. Sub-classes are proposed for residents of New York State and New York City facing similar alleged harms.
As remedies, the suit requests preliminary and permanent injunctions requiring Nester Hosiery to bring its website into compliance with ADA standards by retaining an accessibility consultant; training staff; conducting regular audits; posting an accessibility policy; establishing feedback mechanisms; modifying bug fix procedures; providing customer support trained in accessibility issues; and allowing ongoing monitoring by plaintiff’s counsel. Additionally, Knowles asks for compensatory damages—including statutory fines—for each offense under state law claims, treble damages under General Business Law Section 349 for deceptive practices, attorneys’ fees, costs associated with monitoring compliance after judgment, pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, class certification orders appointing counsel as class representatives, declaratory relief recognizing current practices as discriminatory or misleading under applicable statutes, and any further relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The complaint is signed by attorneys Michael A. LaBollita, Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, and Dana L. Gottlieb from Gottlieb & Associates PLLC in New York City. The case is identified as No. 1:26-cv-02371.
Source: 126cv2371_Carlton_Knowles_v_Nester_Hosiery_Complaint_Southern_District_of_New_York.pdf
