This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Civil Litigation,
Corporate,
Contracts

Oct. 4, 2017

Drafting mandatory forum selection clauses

Contracting parties might agree to a forum selection clause for any number of reasons: to ensure favorable legal precedent, to prevent forum-shopping, to avoid being dragged into litigation in a faraway state. But a forum selection clause won’t do the parties any good unless a court will enforce it.

Contracting parties might agree to a forum selection clause for any number of reasons: to ensure favorable legal precedent, to prevent forum-shopping, to avoid being dragged into litigation in a faraway state. But a forum selection clause won’t do the parties any good unless a court will enforce it. The threshold question for California courts is whether the forum selection clause is mandatory or permissive; in other words, under the language of the contract, whether ...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Sign up for Daily Journal emails