Originally from:

Journal of American Arbitration (JAA) - Vol. 2, No. 2

Preview Page

ARTICLES

Maryland’s Highest Court Holds Acceptance of
Arbitration Agreement Requires Notice in
DIRECTV, Inc. v. Mattingly
By Angela D. Hall
 

I. OVERVIEW
John Mattingly, Sr. purchased satellite equipment from a Circuit
City store in Maryland and subscribed to satellite service provided by
DIRECTV, Inc. (DIRECTV).1 Mattingly made an oral agreement to
accept DIRECTV satellite television service subject to the terms and
conditions of a written customer agreement that was to be mailed to him
at a later date.2 Mattingly’s satellite service was activated immediately.3
Mattingly later received an invoice for the satellite equipment he
purchased, along with the customer agreement.4 The pre-printed
agreement was entitled “‘CUSTOMER AGREEMENT effective as of
August 28, 1996 until replaced’” and it contained a provision titled
“AGREEMENT TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS.”5 The following
language was included in the Terms and Conditions provision:
Customer’s receipt of services constitutes Customer’s acceptance
of and agreement to all terms and conditions of this Agreement.
DIRECTV reserves the right to change these terms and conditions,
including the Applicable Fees and Charges. If any changes are
made, we will send you a written notice describing the change and
its effective date. If a change is not acceptable to you, you may