Replying To An Email Does Not Create A Contract (And Does Not Require Walmart Pay $600 Billion)

from the that's-not-how-the-law-works... dept

While this case involves one of the many ridiculous lawsuits filed by individuals demanding insane sums of money from companies for no good reasons, there are some good points in here (also, like many of these lawsuits, it involves a plaintiff who has history of filing lawsuits). Apparently, a guy by the name of David Stebbins sued Walmart. To understand the basis of the lawsuit, you have to understand that he sent various companies a link to a “contract” on his MySpace page, which he claims presents a binding contract (if you’re particularly risk averse, you may want to avoid clicking on that link, though it’s difficult to believe any such contract is valid). Here are some snippets from the faux contract:

My name is David Anthony Stebbins, and I live in Harrison, AR. I am sending a link to this webpage to various companies to put you on notice: If you contact me in any way, shape, or form, you hereby acknowledge that you have read, understand, and agree to be legally bound by the terms below.


This will also take effect if I attempt to contact you, and, upon hearing my name, you do not cease communications with me on the spot.

[…] You hereby agree to allow me to use, distribute, and sell the rights to your name, physical likeness, and any intellectual property that you may own, throughout the universe, for no fee, for all eternity.

You hereby agree to not request, nor accept any offer for, any third party to remove any material that I use that you feel that you own the copyright to.

You hereby agree that, for now and for all eternity, in the event that I ask you a question, you must answer it promptly, accurately, and truthfully.

You hereby agree to never

Interrupt me when I am speaking, for all eternity.

Hang up on me in any phone call, for all eternity.

Block my attempts to communicate with you, for any reason, for all eternity.

Ask me a question that I have previously answered, for all eternity.

Demonstrate any rudeness, annoyance, or disrespect, however petty, against me, for all eternity.

Accuse me of lying, or any variation thereof, for all eternity.

It goes on along those lines. Anyway, he sent the email to Walmart with the link to this contract. Walmart customer care sent back a standard, boilerplate reply suggesting he contact a different department, which Stebbins used to claim the contract had been entered into (in combination with him also buying a gallon of milk — don’t ask). He sent a letter to Walmart demanding arbitration to settle their “legal dispute.” When Walmart failed to agree to arbitration within 24-hours, he claims that he wins and should get $600 billion (with a b):

“since Wal?Mart did not accept the arbitration invitation within twenty-four hours of receiving it, he automatically wins regardless of the merits of the case and is entitled to an award of six-hundred billion dollars.”

Not surprisingly, the court isn’t buying it:

Plaintiff maintains Wal?Mart accepted the contract by its ?act? of replying to his e-mail….The e-mails from Plaintiff are self-serving documents that did not form the basis for any conduct or performance on Wal?Mart’s part….In this case, Wal?Mart performed no act. It merely replied to two e-mails by directing the Plaintiff to the correct department. It performed no service and Plaintiff made no promise.

Obviously, this particular case is something of a joke, but given how often people seek to claim that a contract has been entered into on dubious terms (such as replying to an email), perhaps a bit of reasonable caselaw comes out of this…

Filed Under: ,
Companies: walmart

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Replying To An Email Does Not Create A Contract (And Does Not Require Walmart Pay $600 Billion)”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

(if you’re particularly risk averse, you may want to avoid clicking on that link, though it’s difficult to believe any such contract is valid)

If anyone feels this way but would like to go anyway, do what I do and add a Legalese header to your browser’s GET requests. Feel free to use mine:

Legalese: policyref=”″

And yes, those of you who can’t see incoming HTTP headers, this is an actual thing that webservers do. (The “policyref” pointing to another page isn’t my own idea.)

Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile) says:

This is priceless.

From the crackpot’s site:

“If you even so much as attempt to litigate a case with me, even if that attempt is unsuccessful, you automatically loose that case.”

Thank god I won’t automatically lose the case. I’ve still got a chance while the case is loose and roaming the halls of the courthouse or whatever.

“You hereby agree that, if I send you a letter, email, fax, or phone call, telling you that you owe me any money (maybe, or maybe not, related to this contract), and you refuse to pay me this money within 48 hours or less, the money that you owe me shall increase tenfold for every period of 24 hours thereafter.”

I’d pay the guy the $5 he’s asking for. By the end of the week, it’s going to be $500,000. I’d counteroffer with $0 and see if he can do the math on that.

You will be exempt from all of the above provisions if one or more of the following conditions are met:

If you are contacting me to formally offer me a job (invitations to job interviews does not count).

Right. We’ve been looking for a candidate to fill the “Moronic Vindictive Asshole” position.

mdpopescu (profile) says:

Re: Re:

I was about to say the same thing. I suspect he is trying to build a case for invalidating EULAs. However, I had previously assumed that EULAs are not allowed to add more restrictions to those indicated by the law, only to lift them, so ridiculous demands in them are already invalid. (This is the case in my country, I thought it’s the same in the US.) Eg, an EULA can say “you are allowed to make up to five copies and distribute them to friends”; it cannot say “you are not allowed to play this game if a friend or family is watching without paying an additional license”.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Sorry but aren't we all missing the point

That’s what I thought. It may even be of some use by having a ruling of this nature that reading/responding is not an act by itself that can qualify as agreeing to a contract.

I absolutely laugh at the legalese people put at the bottom of their (usually corporate) emails that state that you have agreed to something by reading or receiving the email. Everyone’s an armchair lawyer. I often wonder if such legal hubris extends outside the US to the same degree.

Tired of It says:

Re: Sorry but aren't we all missing the point

No, he is really suing these people. Just google his name as Plaintiff David Stebbins and look at the poor people he is suing for large amounts of money for nothing. And he is not only attacking large businesses! It looks like he is just another guy that does not want to work…and has found a scam to get free money. (looks like one small company already settled with him). He should be arrested and tried for Fraud.

Greevar (profile) says:

Is he mad or a genius?

I can’t say for certain. But he does make a good case for pointing out the unenforceable terms of EULA’s and TOS. It’s about as binding as such. There’s really no proof of a “meeting of the minds” as a legal contract requires and the terms are absurdly slanted in his favor. It sounds like an EULA/TOS to me. I hope the guy isn’t just nuts and is honestly trying to set precedent against such predatory agreements.

It reminds me of this:

velox says:

The courts, including SCOTUS, continue to punt on dealing with the glaring problem which is obvious to the rest of us — that EULAs do not in practice function in the same way as normal contracts do, even though in theory a EULA should represent a valid contract.
Its somewhat encouraging that, as noted during the past year on TD, two of our most prominent judges — Richard Posner and John Roberts have publicly recognized the problem. How long it will be before any actual movement on the issue occurs is anybody’s guess, however. — Let’s hope its sometime before all eternity.

One can only hope that by continuing to call out examples of ridiculous EULA situations, that eventually the inherent problems in this application of contract law will get the attention they deserve in opinions of the courts.

Greg G (profile) says:

I think I’ll rewrite his entire “contract” for him.

My name is David Anthony Stebbins, and I live in Harrison, AR. I am sending a link to this webpage to various companies to put you on notice: If you contact me in any way, shape, or form, you hereby acknowledge that you have read, understand, and agree to be legally bound by the terms below.

You hereby will let me do whatever I want, including, but not limited to, taking everything you own and using it at my discretion, for my own benefit. You will get nothing for all eternity and like it!

You will not speak to me using any form of communication, including, but not limited to, verbally face to face, email, telephone, telegraph & morse code, text messaging, instant messaging and any form of social media, snail-mail, braille, smoke signals, semaphore, aldis lamps, blinking once for no, twice for yes, heiroglyphics, and any other form yet to be invented, for all eternity.

You may ignore the above if you are going to give me money. In this case, give me the money, then piss off, for all eternity.

Robert Shaver (profile) says:

Works just like "shrink wrap" & "terms of service"

Well, this is good news.

This is just like those “shrink wrap” licenses on software that said something like, “By opening this package you agree to the following terms …”. And the same goes for “terms of service” that nobody reads.

So now we have case law that can be used against these other silly “contracts”, right?

Mike42 (profile) says:

Just Bored

Look. This guy lives in Harrison, AK, probably the most boring place in the world. I know, I spent many a weekend there working at a warehouse. The place is a dry county!
So this guy got sick of running across the state border in search of some hooch, plus someone probably stole his sheep, and he wrote up a fake EULA. So what? Pay the man! He has to live in Harrison!

Anonymous Coward says:

Go to law school

He can only enter into a legal contract with Walmart if he works directly with the people who are authorized in the organization to approve the contract. He may as well ask a store clerk to sign a paper saying Walmart owes him 6 millions dollars – good luck collecting that. I’m just curious as to why the person wants the negative attention they garner for being a douchebag.

aldestrawk says:

a job for David Anthony Stebbins

I hereby retain David Anthony Stebbins to exclusively represent me (Aldestrawk) in negotiations with Satan. Compensation is payable only after said negotiations are completed. The amount of compensation will be a full 50% of all funds, goods, privileges, and any other perks obtained from Satan as a result of said negotiations. There will be no compensation if such negotiations never take place. Until the day Satan appears before me, David Anthony Stebbins, will not contact me through any form whatsoever, or come to my attention in any other way.


Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...