Feldman v. Google, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the plaintiff had the duty to read terms that were presented in a scroll box and required a click to agree and, therefore, the fact that the entire contract was not visible in the scroll box was irrelevant
• determining that the forum selection clause was enforceable and “even if any of the provisions of the contract were unenforceable, these provisions could be modified or severed under the . . . severability clause”
• applying “traditional principles of contract law” to determine enforceability of terms and conditions governing a “clickwrap” agreement
• noting, in considering enforceability of terms available for review on internet site, that under “traditional principles of contract law,” focus is “whether the plaintiff had reasonable notice of and manifested assent to ... agreement”
• finding a forum selection clause in a “clickwrap” agreement valid and enforceable
• upholding and 7 enforcing 60-day claim period in Google’s AdWords Agreement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).