This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Ps, more than two dozen gift-card purchasers allegedly had the experience of buying D gift cards only to have them turn out to be worthless. Ps alleged that third parties tampered with the gift cards and then stole the funds that were loaded onto them. D refused to provide a refund, and Ps sued. D filed a motion to compel arbitration. This was based on a notation on the back of the gift cards directing purchasers to 'see Walmart.com for complete terms.' Anyone who did would find an arbitration provision covering 'ALL DISPUTES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THESE TERMS OF USE OR ANY ASPECT OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YOU AND WALMART.' Customers 'accepted' arbitration, according to the website, by 'using or accessing D's sites.' D moved to enforce the arbitration clause. The district court held there was no agreement to arbitrate, because there was no proof that the 'Ps saw the terms of use, were otherwise aware that the terms existed before filing this lawsuit, or saw the notice on the gift cards that the terms applied.' D appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.