In September, I blogged about a Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision to review an intermediate appellate court decision holding that Uber’s “clickwrap” arbitration agreement was not enforceable under Pennsylvania law, as mutual assent was lacking based on the way it was presented to a user.
Today, the New York Court of Appeals issued its own decision about Uber’s clickwrap arbitration agreement, finding it was an enforceable contract under New York law, and thus that the question of whether that agreement applied to plaintiffs’ claims that had already been filed in court was one delegated to an arbitrator. Neither the majority nor the dissent mentioned the Pennsylvania intermediate court’s decision.
