On February 4, 2025, a federal judge ruled that Rogolino et al. v. Walmart Inc. must move to arbitration. The lawsuit alleged Walmart unlawfully charged Florida customers a 7% sales tax on delivery fees, which the plaintiff claimed is illegal when customers can opt for in-store pickup.
The court’s decision hinged on a hyperlink to Walmart’s terms of use on its retail site, which included a binding arbitration clause that the plaintiff claimed was not readily apparent. The judge determined that the website’s link to its terms — underlined, capitalized, and clearly displayed — provided sufficient notice to shoppers that making a purchase signaled agreement to those terms, dismissing the plaintiff’s claim that the arbitration clause was hidden.
The case offers insight into Florida’s taxability rules for delivery fees based on the method of receipt and underscores the growing significance of arbitration clauses in e-commerce contracts, which can limit consumers’ ability to pursue legal action in court. (Rogolino et al. v. Walmart Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-14308, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida)