We'll help you find the right solution for your needs
Does this sound like your topic?
Case Conclusion Date: 05.22.2008
Practice Area: Contracts and agreements
Outcome: Court of Appeals ruled in favor of our client
Description: Our client, which had no business or other contacts with the State of Ohio, was sued in Ohio pursuant to a "floating forum selection" clause in its contract. We moved to dismiss the case at the trial court level, and were initially denied. Since the plaintiff company had sued hundreds of similarly situated defendants, all of the cases were eventually consolidated in the Court of Common Pleas before a single judge. That judge agreed with us that the forum selection clause could not be used to hale our client into court in Ohio if our client had neither consented to being sued in Ohio, nor transacted any business in Ohio. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeals. In its opinion, Preferred Capital, Inc. v. Check Mate Priority Servs., 2008 Ohio 2657, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 2243 (Ohio Ct. App., Cuyahoga County May 22, 2008), the Court of Appeals for the 8th District affirmed the trial court's ruling, and dismissed the lawsuit against our client.