A recent court ruling in Pennsylvania could have major implications for online agreements and consumer rights. The case involves Kennywood, a historic Pittsburgh-area amusement park, and its parent company, Festival Fun Parks LLC, which attempted to enforce an arbitration clause against season ticket holders. However, a judge ruled the clause was unenforceable due to a lack of clear warning.
The Issue: Hidden Arbitration Clause
When purchasing season tickets online, buyers had to check a box agreeing to the park’s terms and conditions. However, the page did not clearly inform customers that they were waiving their right to a jury trial. Instead, the arbitration clause was buried in the terms and conditions, accessible only through a hyperlink.
Citing the 2023 Pennsylvania Superior Court decision in Chilutti v. Uber Technologies Inc., Allegheny County Judge Alan Hertzberg ruled that such agreements are unenforceable unless they meet a two-part test:
- The customer must be explicitly informed that they are waiving their right to a jury trial.
- The waiver cannot be hidden in lengthy terms and conditions.
Since Kennywood’s online agreement failed this test, the court denied Festival Fun Parks’ request to send the case to arbitration.
The Lawsuit: Unfair Trade Practices Claim
The proposed class-action lawsuit, filed by lead plaintiff Joshua Miller, argues that Kennywood misled season ticket buyers by failing to disclose that the park’s popular Steel Curtain roller coaster would be closed for the entire 2024 season. Miller claims this omission violates Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law and alleges the park profited from customers who might not have purchased passes had they known about the ride closure.
What’s Next?
Festival Fun Parks has appealed the decision to Pennsylvania’s Superior Court, which is expected to rule on the issue later this year. Meanwhile, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court is reviewing Chilutti, a case that could impact the enforceability of online arbitration agreements statewide.
This case serves as a reminder for businesses to ensure transparency in their online agreements and for consumers to carefully review the terms of any purchase—especially when arbitration clauses are involved.
Miller and the proposed class are represented by John A. Biedrzycki III of Steel City Lawyer.
Festival Fun Parks is represented by Patrick K. Cavanaugh, Bryan C. Devine and Hugh T. McKeegan of Del Sole Cavanaugh Stroyd LLC.
The case is Miller v. Festival Fun Parks, case number GD-23-004627, in the Court of Common Pleas for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, and case number 92 WDA 2025 in the Superior Court of Pennsylvania.
