Justice Thomas Feinman

 

Read Full-Text Decision

Defendants moved to change venue to New York County in this action by plaintiffs for breach of contract and guaranty that sought damages and attorney fees. They noted they resided in Florida, while plaintiff resided in N.Y., claiming the forum selection clause in the subject contract was ineffective. Defendants argued the forum selection clause was a “floating forum selection clause” and invalid as it “did not fix a place, county or trial.” The court noted forum selection clauses were prima facie valid and enforced as they provided certainty in resolving disputes, but were not enforced if they lacked specificity regarding any particular jurisdiction and a defendant had no way to know what state it would be required to litigate. Yet, it found the clause herein was clear and specific, designating N.Y courts as the contract containing the clause provided that all actions arising from the contract were to be litigated in state or federal courts within N.Y. and parties consented to jurisdiction in any N.Y. or federal court that would apply the law of N.Y. S. Therefore, the court concluded as the forum selection clause herein was valid and binding upon the parties, the court had jurisdiction over defendants, finding venue was proper and denying defendants’ motion.

Justice Thomas Feinman

 

Read Full-Text Decision

Defendants moved to change venue to New York County in this action by plaintiffs for breach of contract and guaranty that sought damages and attorney fees. They noted they resided in Florida, while plaintiff resided in N.Y., claiming the forum selection clause in the subject contract was ineffective. Defendants argued the forum selection clause was a “floating forum selection clause” and invalid as it “did not fix a place, county or trial.” The court noted forum selection clauses were prima facie valid and enforced as they provided certainty in resolving disputes, but were not enforced if they lacked specificity regarding any particular jurisdiction and a defendant had no way to know what state it would be required to litigate. Yet, it found the clause herein was clear and specific, designating N.Y courts as the contract containing the clause provided that all actions arising from the contract were to be litigated in state or federal courts within N.Y. and parties consented to jurisdiction in any N.Y. or federal court that would apply the law of N.Y. S. Therefore, the court concluded as the forum selection clause herein was valid and binding upon the parties, the court had jurisdiction over defendants, finding venue was proper and denying defendants’ motion.