•
Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP logo
Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP

Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP: Key Legal Risks in Website Terms & Conditions

Our analysis of BFKN's Terms & Conditions uncovers critical legal risks, including liability gaps and ambiguous clauses, with actionable solutions to strengthen enforceability.

## When Legal Ambiguity Means Real Financial Risk: BFKN’s Terms & Conditions Under the Microscope

Imagine a scenario where a website user claims damages from a data breach, or a regulatory body investigates for non-compliance with consumer protection laws. Our analysis of Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP’s (BFKN) Terms & Conditions reveals several legal and logical vulnerabilities that could expose the firm to significant financial and reputational harm—potentially exceeding $250,000 in litigation costs or regulatory fines in a single incident.

1. Unilateral Amendment of Terms Without User Notice BFKN’s terms state that users are responsible for checking updates and that continued use constitutes acceptance, but do not require the firm to notify users of material changes. This creates enforceability issues under consumer protection laws (e.g., FTC guidance, EU Directive 93/13/EEC), which often require clear notice for contractual amendments. Failure to provide notice could invalidate updated terms and expose the firm to disputes or regulatory action.

Legal Analysis
high Risk
Removed
Added
We may make changes to the site or these terms at any time. It is our practice to postFor any material changes we make to these terms on this page, and any changeswe will be effective once the new terms are postedprovide users with reasonable advance notice via email or prominent site notification. ItChanges will become effective only after such notice is your responsibility to check these terms for updatesprovided. You will be able to determine when these terms were last updated by referring to the “Last Modified” legend at the top. You understand and agree that your continued access to orContinued use of the site after any posted modification to these terms indicates yourthe effective date constitutes acceptance of the modifications, even if you did not take the time to read themrevised terms.

Legal Explanation

The original clause places the entire burden on users to monitor changes, which is inconsistent with consumer protection laws requiring clear notice of material amendments. The revision ensures enforceability by mandating user notification and compliance with regulatory best practices.

2. Overbroad Warranty Disclaimer Potentially Unenforceable The disclaimer section attempts to exclude all warranties, including those that may not be waivable under state law. This overreach can render the clause unenforceable and subject the firm to statutory damages or class actions. For example, California Civil Code § 1793.2 restricts such disclaimers for consumers, and non-compliance could result in penalties of $5,000 per violation.

Legal Analysis
high Risk
Removed
Added
TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAWTo the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, WE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIESwe disclaim all warranties, EXPRESS OR IMPLIEDexpress or implied, INCLUDING IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITYincluding implied warranties of merchantability, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSEfitness for a particular purpose, AND NONand non-INFRINGEMENTinfringement. Nothing in these terms shall exclude or limit any warranty or liability that cannot be excluded or limited under applicable law.

Legal Explanation

The original disclaimer is overly broad and may attempt to waive non-waivable rights, risking unenforceability. The revision clarifies compliance with mandatory consumer protections, reducing exposure to statutory claims.

3. Ambiguous Limitation of Liability Clause The limitation of liability provision is vague regarding the types of damages excluded and does not specify a monetary cap. Courts may strike down ambiguous or unconscionable limitations, leading to unpredictable exposure. A single adverse judgment could exceed $100,000 in compensatory and punitive damages if the clause is invalidated.

Legal Analysis
critical Risk
Removed
Added
WE WILL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGES OR INJURYExcept as prohibited by applicable law, INCLUDING INDIRECTour liability for any claim arising out of or relating to the use of the site shall not exceed $1, INCIDENTAL000 in aggregate. We shall not be liable for indirect, SPECIALincidental, PUNITIVEspecial, EXEMPLARY OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING LOST PROFITS AND DAMAGES THAT RESULT FROM INCONVENIENCEpunitive, DELAYexemplary, OR LOSS OF USE) THAT RESULT FROM THE USE OFor consequential damages, THE INABILITY TO USE, OR RELIANCE UPON, THE SITE AND THE CONTENT OR ANY SERVICES OBTAINED ON OR THROUGH THE SITE, EVEN IF THERE IS NEGLIGENCE, IF WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES, OR ANY OF THE ABOVEexcept where such limitation is prohibited by law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is ambiguous and lacks a clear monetary cap, which courts may find unconscionable. The revision introduces a specific cap and carve-out for non-waivable claims, improving predictability and enforceability.

4. Lack of Governing Law and Jurisdiction Specification The T&C omits a governing law and jurisdiction clause, leaving disputes open to forum shopping and increased litigation costs. Without a specified forum, the firm could face lawsuits in unfavorable jurisdictions, raising defense costs by 30-50% and increasing settlement pressure.

Legal Analysis
high Risk
Removed
Added
[No governingThese terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Illinois, without regard to its conflict of law principles. Any disputes arising from or relating to these terms shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction clause present]of the state and federal courts located in Cook County, Illinois.

Legal Explanation

Omitting a governing law and jurisdiction clause exposes the firm to forum shopping and increased litigation costs. The revision provides clarity and predictability, reducing the risk of unfavorable venues and inconsistent outcomes.

---

Conclusion: Proactive Redlining for Legal Resilience Our examination shows that even sophisticated firms like BFKN can benefit from targeted contract improvements. Addressing these issues not only reduces regulatory and litigation risk but also demonstrates a commitment to transparent, enforceable user agreements.

  • How confident are you that your terms would withstand regulatory scrutiny or a class action?
  • What would a single unenforceable clause cost your business in real terms?
  • Are you proactively redlining your contracts for maximum legal resilience?

This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For actual legal guidance, consult with a licensed attorney. This assessment is based on publicly available information and professional legal analysis. See erayaha.ai’s terms of service for liability limitations.