Cullinan v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the hyperlink \may\ not be enough to alert a reasonably prudent user to click on it
• disagreeing that a “hyperlink was sufficiently conspicuous to ‘put a reasonable user on notice of the Terms of Use’”
• recognizing “the practical reality that the checkout flow is laid out in such a manner that it tended to conceal the fact that placing an order was an express acceptance of [defendant’s] rules and regulations.”
• providing that “an offeree, regardless of apparent manifestation of his consent is 13 not bound by inconspicuous contractual provisions of which he was unaware, contained in 14 a document whose contractual nature is not obvious”
• recognizing “the practical reality that the checkout flow is laid out in such a manner that it tended to conceal the fact that placing an order was an express acceptance of [defendant's] rules and regulations.”
• applying de novo standard of review because the conspicuousness of a hyperlink is a 3 | pure question of law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).