Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Date: 07-26-2023
Case Style:
Case Number: 22-CV-444
Judge: James D. Peterson
Court: United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (Dane County)
Plaintiff's Attorney: Nichloas Fairweather and Sophia Gold
Defendant's Attorney: Mark D. Taticchi and Michael Patrick Daly
Description: Madison, Wisconsin consumer law lawyers represented Plaintiff who sued defendant for unjust enrichment, breach of contract, and violations of state consumer protection law violations.
In this proposed class action, plaintiff Pilar Domer alleges that defendant Menard, Inc., the owner of Menards home improvement stores, adds a hidden fee to items purchased on the Menards website that are picked up in-store. Domer's initial complaint asserted claims for unjust enrichment, breach of contract, and violations of state consumer protection statutes. Dkt. 1-1. Menards moved to compel Domer to arbitrate her claims, Dkt. 6, and Domer responded by submitting an amended complaint that omitted her claims for breach of contract. Dkt. 11. The court denied Menards' arbitration motion without prejudice. Dkt. 18.
Before the court is Menards' renewed motion to compel arbitration directed at Domer's amended complaint. Dkt. 19. Menards contends that the arbitration clause in Menards' terms of service applies to all of Domer's claims, not just her now-abandoned claims for breach of contract. Domer counters that she did not agree to arbitrate her claims, and that even if she did, her remaining claims fall outside of the scope of the agreement. The court will grant Menards' motion. Menards' website gave Domer reasonable notice that she was accepting Menards' terms of service by placing an order, so Domer agreed to the arbitration clause by completing her purchase. Domer's consumer protection and unjust enrichment claims related to her purchase fall within the broad language of the arbitration clause.
Outcome: In this proposed class action, plaintiff Pilar Domer alleges that defendant Menard, Inc., the owner of Menards home improvement stores, adds a hidden fee to items purchased on the Menards website that are picked up in-store. Domer's initial complaint asserted claims for unjust enrichment, breach of contract, and violations of state consumer protection statutes. Dkt. 1-1. Menards moved to compel Domer to arbitrate her claims, Dkt. 6, and Domer responded by submitting an amended complaint that omitted her claims for breach of contract. Dkt. 11. The court denied Menards' arbitration motion without prejudice. Dkt. 18.
Before the court is Menards' renewed motion to compel arbitration directed at Domer's amended complaint. Dkt. 19. Menards contends that the arbitration clause in Menards' terms of service applies to all of Domer's claims, not just her now-abandoned claims for breach of contract. Domer counters that she did not agree to arbitrate her claims, and that even if she did, her remaining claims fall outside of the scope of the agreement. The court will grant Menards' motion. Menards' website gave Domer reasonable notice that she was accepting Menards' terms of service by placing an order, so Domer agreed to the arbitration clause by completing her purchase. Domer's consumer protection and unjust enrichment claims related to her purchase fall within the broad language of the arbitration clause.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: