On August 11, 2017, the Appellate Division reached a decision in the matter Dugan v. Best Buy Co., 2023 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2053 (App. Div. August 11, 2017). The case involved the enforceability of an Arbitration Agreement, which required Best Buy employees to pursue employment-related claims in arbitration rather than court. While the Court found that Best Buy’s arbitration policy satisfactorily alerted employees that they were waiving their right to sue in court, it determined that the plaintiff, a former employee, did not assent to the terms of the agreement when he electronically acknowledged the policy. The Court noted that a party can assent to the terms of a contract by electronically clicking on a website box. However, in this case, the Court determined that the plaintiff’s mouse-click on the acknowledgment box did not manifest his assent to the policy, only that he read and understood the policy. The Court stated that Best Buy could have firmly established the plaintiff’s assent by adding the words “and agree to the terms of the policy” to the acknowledgment box. The Court could not find any evidence that the plaintiff agreed to the terms of the policy, and as a result, the Arbitration Agreement was deemed unenforceable as to the employee. Language The wording of an arbitration clause can make all the difference when it comes to whether the clause will stand up in court if it is challenged as unenforceable. As a matter of practicality, it is important for employers […]