Meyer v. Uber Technologies, Inc. Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A user sued Uber, which sought to compel arbitration. The court found the app’s registration screen provided sufficient notice of its hyperlinked terms of service, creating a binding contract to arbitrate even though the user never read them or clicked an “I agree” box.
Legal Significance: Establishes a key precedent for the enforceability of “sign-in-wrap” agreements on mobile applications, holding that reasonably conspicuous notice and an unambiguous manifestation of assent can form a binding contract without an explicit “I agree” checkbox.
Meyer v. Uber Technologies, Inc. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Spencer Meyer downloaded the Uber app and registered for an account on his smartphone. The registration process involved two screens. The first collected personal information. The second, the “Payment Screen,” required credit card details. Below the payment fields and directly above the final “REGISTER” button, text stated, “By creating an Uber account, you agree to the TERMS OF SERVICE & PRIVACY POLICY.” The phrase “TERMS OF SERVICE & PRIVACY POLICY” was a conspicuous, blue, underlined hyperlink that led to the full terms, which included a mandatory arbitration clause. Meyer completed the registration by clicking the “REGISTER” button but later declared he never saw the hyperlink, did not click it, and was unaware of the arbitration provision. After using the service, Meyer filed a class-action lawsuit against Uber’s CEO, alleging price-fixing. Uber was joined as a defendant and moved to compel arbitration based on its Terms of Service. The district court denied the motion, finding no contract was formed.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Did a user unambiguously assent to an arbitration agreement contained within hyperlinked terms of service by clicking a “Register” button on a mobile app screen that provided reasonably conspicuous notice of those terms?
Yes. The court held that Meyer unambiguously assented to Uber’s Terms of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non p
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Did a user unambiguously assent to an arbitration agreement contained within hyperlinked terms of service by clicking a “Register” button on a mobile app screen that provided reasonably conspicuous notice of those terms?
Conclusion
This case provides a governing framework for analyzing contract formation on mobile Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate
Legal Rule
Under California law, a binding contract is formed if the offeree receives Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qu
Legal Analysis
The court applied an objective standard, evaluating the user interface from the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A “sign-in-wrap” agreement is enforceable if a “reasonably prudent smartphone user”