Duick v. Toyota Motor Sales

198 Cal. App. 4th 1316 (2011)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Duick v. Toyota Motor Sales

California Court of Appeal
198 Cal. App. 4th 1316 (2011)

SC
Play video

Facts

Toyota Motor Sales (Toyota) (defendant) began an advertising campaign called “Your Other You.” As part of this campaign, a person (player 1) could register someone else (player 2) to participate. Player 2 would receive an email, purportedly from player 1, telling player 2 about the game and providing player 2 with a hyperlink to click to participate. Upon clicking the link, player 2 was presented with terms and conditions that he or she would need to click through to continue. The terms and conditions required that any dispute be resolved via arbitration. In this series of links, the game was labeled as a personality evaluation. Once participating in the game, player 2 would receive a series of emails from a fictional third party that appeared to have player 2’s personal information. Amber Duick (plaintiff) received an email inviting her to play the game. Duick clicked the link and began receiving unsolicited, disturbing emails, purportedly from a man she did not know. The man knew Duick’s address and other personal information and stated that he planned to stay with Duick, to “lay low at [her] place for a bit. Till it all blows over.” A subsequent email indicated that the man was on the run from police. Ultimately, a final email revealed that the man was fictional and that the game was a prank. Duick sued Toyota for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, and false advertising. Toyota filed a motion to compel arbitration based on the game’s terms and conditions. The trial court denied the motion, and Toyota appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Rothschild, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership