Jackson v. Experian Information Solutions
Angela Jackson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.; Equifax Information Services, LLC; Trans Union LLC; Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC
- John Tunheim
- 0:25-cv-00730
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 8
In Jackson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Judge Tunheim granted Experian's motion to compel arbitration, finding that Angela Jackson validly agreed to arbitrate her Fair Credit Reporting Act claims when she clicked the 'Create Your Account' button on Experian's CreditWorks enrollment webpage, which displayed a clear notice and hyperlink to the Terms of Use Agreement containing an arbitration clause.
Consumers who have enrolled in Experian's CreditWorks credit monitoring service online and agreed to its Terms of Use; individuals bringing Fair Credit Reporting Act or similar claims against Experian who may be subject to mandatory arbitration clauses accepted through online enrollment; parties litigating the enforceability of clickwrap arbitration agreements under Minnesota law.
What happened
In Jackson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., plaintiff Angela Jackson sued four defendants — Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Equifax Information Services, LLC, Trans Union LLC, and Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC — claiming violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (a federal law governing how consumer credit information is collected and used) and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (a federal law restricting how debt collectors may behave). Jackson later dropped her claims against Equifax and Trans Union, leaving her claims against Experian and Portfolio. Experian then asked the court to force the dispute into private arbitration rather than continue in federal court, based on an arbitration clause in the Terms of Use Agreement that Jackson allegedly accepted when she signed up for Experian's CreditWorks credit monitoring service.
Experian supported its motion with a declaration from Dan Smith, the Director of Product Operations for ConsumerInfo.com, Inc. (an Experian affiliate that operates CreditWorks), describing how the enrollment webpage worked. Jackson argued that Smith's declaration was inadmissible because he lacked the required firsthand knowledge, and also argued that the webpage did not give her adequate notice of the arbitration clause to show she truly agreed to it. The court rejected both arguments. It found Smith's knowledge of the enrollment process — gained through his job responsibilities and review of business records — was sufficient, and it distinguished a case from another federal appeals court (Sgouros v. TransUnion Corporation) where a website was found to provide inadequate notice, noting that the CreditWorks page clearly placed the disclosure and a hyperlink to the full Terms of Use right next to the button Jackson clicked.
Judge Tunheim granted Experian's motion to compel arbitration, concluding that the clickwrap agreement — where a user indicates agreement by clicking a button after being shown notice of the terms — was valid under Minnesota contract law and that Jackson's click of 'Create Your Account' constituted her agreement to the arbitration clause. The case against Experian is now paused (stayed) while arbitration proceeds. Jackson's claims against Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC remain active in federal court. Jackson and Experian must file a joint status report within 30 days after a final arbitration decision is issued.
The detailed version
Case
Angela Jackson v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.; Equifax Information Services, LLC; Trans Union LLC; Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC, Civil No. 25-730 (JRT/EMB), United States District Court, District of Minnesota.
Judge
John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge.
Date
March 23, 2026.
Background
Plaintiff Angela Jackson brought claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq., against all four defendants, and under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) against Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC (Portfolio). She subsequently dismissed her claims against Equifax Information Services, LLC and Trans Union LLC, leaving only Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (Experian) and Portfolio as defendants.
On January 25, 2021, Jackson enrolled in CreditWorks, a credit monitoring service provided by Experian Consumer Services (ECS), an Experian affiliate that also does business as ConsumerInfo.com, Inc. (CIC). During enrollment, Jackson completed a single webform requiring her personal information and a password. Immediately below the email and password fields, and directly above the 'Create Your Account' button, was a disclosure reading: 'By clicking 'Create Your Account': I accept and agree to your Terms of Use Agreement, as well as acknowledge receipt of your Privacy Policy.' The phrases 'Terms of Use Agreement' and 'Privacy Policy' appeared in bold, blue text, with 'Terms of Use Agreement' hyperlinked to the full text. The Terms of Use Agreement contained a binding arbitration clause requiring any claims against ECS (defined to include its affiliates) arising from the services, websites, or CreditWorks membership to be resolved in arbitration.
Motion to Compel Arbitration
Experian moved to compel arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. § 3, arguing that the arbitration clause in the Terms of Use Agreement covers Jackson's FCRA claims and that Jackson assented to the agreement by clicking 'Create Your Account.' Portfolio took no position on the motion but requested that Jackson's claims against it remain in federal court regardless of the outcome.
Standard of Review
The court noted it does not assess the merits of the underlying dispute but only whether the parties agreed to arbitrate. The party seeking to compel arbitration bears the burden of proving a valid and enforceable agreement. State contract law governs formation of the arbitration agreement; both parties agreed Minnesota law applies. Under Minnesota law, contract formation requires mutual assent judged by an objective standard — meaning a party's outward conduct, not subjective intent, controls.
Issue 1 — Admissibility of the Smith Declaration
Jackson challenged the declaration of Dan Smith, Director of Product Operations for CIC, arguing he lacked the personal knowledge required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c)(4). The court rejected this argument. Citing a nearly identical prior case, Jones v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., Civ. No. 23-3887, 2025 WL 227198 (D. Minn. Jan. 7, 2025), the court held that Smith's firsthand knowledge of the enrollment process — derived from his job duties and review of business records — was sufficient. The court also cited Jain v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., 779 F.3d 753 (8th Cir. 2015), for the proposition that lay opinion testimony is admissible based on personal knowledge or industry experience. The court noted Jackson provided no Eighth Circuit authority requiring Smith to specifically identify each document he relied upon.
Issue 2 — Mutual Assent / Validity of Clickwrap Agreement
The court analyzed whether the enrollment process constituted a valid 'clickwrap agreement' — a type of online contract where a user proceeds only by affirmatively clicking a button to accept displayed terms. Citing Ballou v. Asset Mktg. Services, LLC, 46 F.4th 844 (8th Cir. 2022), and Siebert v. Amateur Athletic Union of U.S., Inc., 422 F. Supp. 2d 1033 (D. Minn. 2006), the court held that clicking the 'Create Your Account' button constituted objective assent to the Terms of Use, including the arbitration clause.
Jackson relied on Sgouros v. TransUnion Corporation, 817 F.3d 1029 (7th Cir. 2016), where the Seventh Circuit (a different federal appeals court) found insufficient notice to support mutual assent. The court distinguished Sgouros, noting that in that case the webpage did not direct users to the full agreement or mention they were agreeing to contractual terms. Here, the disclosure and hyperlink were 'clear, conspicuous, next to one another, and not hard to find or placed in small font at the bottom of the page,' consistent with the court's own prior ruling in Jones.
Ruling
Judge Tunheim granted Experian's motion to compel arbitration. The court stayed (paused) the litigation solely as between Jackson and Experian pending arbitration. Jackson's claims against Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC remain pending in federal court. Jackson and Experian are ordered to file a joint status report within 30 days after a final arbitration order is entered.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 8-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.