If your Terms are buried, don’t expect them to hold up in court.

In a major blow to forced arbitration tactics, the Ninth Circuit affirmed that JustAnswer LLC couldn’t compel users to arbitrate claims because its Terms of Service weren’t clearly presented. Plaintiffs, who thought they were paying a one-time fee for expert Q&As, were unknowingly enrolled in recurring monthly subscriptions. The court held that JustAnswer’s “sign-in wrap” failed to give users proper notice—small fonts, poor placement, and vague language meant no clear assent was ever given. This case is a stark reminder: under California law, a contract requires conspicuous terms and unambiguous agreement. For litigation teams, it’s a goldmine of lessons on digital consent, enforceability, and user interface as evidence.