Designing Enforceable Opt-Ins: Lessons from Dahdah v. Rocket Mortgage
When websites tell users they agree to terms by clicking a button, when does that click actually bind them? In Dahdah v. Rocket Mortgage, LLC, No. 24-1910, 2026 LX 73742 (6th Cir. Jan. 26, 2026), the Sixth Circuit addressed that question in a setting familiar to many businesses: a consumer entering information on a lead-generation site and clicking buttons to move forward.
The Online Opt-In at Issue
LowerMyBills.com connects consumers interested in refinancing with affiliated lenders, including Rocket Mortgage. Rather than using an “I agree” checkbox, the site told users that by clicking buttons such as “Calculate,” they would agree to its hyperlinked Terms of Use, which included a broad arbitration provision.
The consumer visited the site multiple times, entered his information, and clicked the relevant buttons. After later suing Rocket over unwanted calls, Rocket invoked the arbitration provision. The district court rejected that argument, but the Sixth Circuit disagreed.
What Makes an Online Opt-In Enforceable?
Because LowerMyBills used a “hybrid” or “sign-in wrap” design, the key question was whether the site gave users reasonably conspicuous notice that clicking a button would constitute acceptance of contractual terms. Looking to prior cases, the Sixth Circuit identified four recurring questions courts ask under the totality of the circumstances:
Is the page cluttered or clean? Courts are more likely to enforce opt-ins presented on simple, streamlined pages. Excessive graphics, ads, or competing content make notice easier to miss and less likely to be deemed conspicuous.
How close is the notice to the button? Placement matters. Notice that appears directly above or below the action button strongly favors enforceability, while notice placed farther away weighs against it.
Does the design draw visual attention to the terms? Small font alone is not fatal if hyperlinks are visually distinct, such as through contrasting colors. Tiny, gray, barely legible text with no visual cues cuts the other way.
Would users expect a contractual relationship? When an interaction signals an ongoing or forward-looking relationship, such as referrals and follow-up communications, users are more likely to expect that contractual terms apply.
Applying these factors, the court held that LowerMyBills’ opt-in was enforceable. The pages were relatively uncluttered, the notice appeared immediately next to the buttons being clicked, the hyperlinks to the Terms of Use were visually distinct, and the referral process suggested an ongoing relationship rather than a one-off interaction.
A Practical Roadmap for Lead Generators
The Sixth Circuit’s opinion delivers a clear message for lead generators and other online businesses: enforceability turns on design, not magic words. Clean layouts, notice placed immediately next to action buttons, visually distinct links, and context signaling an ongoing relationship all increase the likelihood that a user’s click will be treated as meaningful assent. But poor placement, cluttered pages, or barely legible text invite litigation risk. In short, clicks can create binding contracts, but only when websites clearly communicate what a click means in a way reasonable users are likely to notice and understand.
Need help designing your opt ins? Reach out.