Legal Question in Business Law in California

I would ask the Bobs.

A check of California and nationwide law did not turn up any specific minimum font size. This doesn't mean there is no minimum in some rule, statute, policy or decision somewhere, even in California; it simply means my routine check of readily-available sources didn't turn it up.

I did find a couple of out-of-state (non-California) cases mentioning employee handbook font size. One said that a statement declaring that the handbook did not create a contract with the employee could be any font size and placed anywhere in the handbook and would still be effective. I assume the court meant any legible font size. I cannot imagine any court upholding as binding any print too small to be read by a person with good near vision.

I would say that most courts would apply a "rule of reason" to the general legibility of printing in an employee handbook. This is also the rule regarding legibility in so-called "contracts of adhesion" which are those standardized form contracts you are asked to sign without any opportunity to negotiate when, for example, you join a gym or rernt a canoe.

There is a general tendency in contract-legibility cases for courts to disregard the actual font size number, e.g., "11" or "8.5-point" and instead just discuss general legibility and readability such as clarity, emphasis (color, boldface, capitalization) and placement within the document. Font size is obviously a significant factor, but I don't find decisions (or laws) saying 8.5 point is too small, or 11 point is the minimum. However, I hasten to add that California law and Rules of Court are full of minimum font size requirements that apply in specific situations, see, e.g., Civil Code sections 1677(b); 1689.7(a)(1); 1689.21(a) and (b); 1694.7(b); 1695.5(a) etc.; Rules of Court 2.104; 8.204(b)(4) etc.