Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A Victory for Forum-Selection Clauses
A recent United States Supreme Court decision, Atlantic Marine Construction, Inc. v. United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, et al, 134 S. Ct. 568, overturns both the United States District Court for the District of Western Texas and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. After rejecting the legal analysis applied in both the lower court and the appeals court, the Supreme Court concluded that where two parties enter into a contract which contains a forum-selection clause and one party attempts to file an action in a jurisdiction not covered by the forum-selection clause: 1) the party defying the clause has the burden of proving that the forum bargained for is inappropriate; 2) when analyzing whether the venue is proper, there is no consideration to be given to the parties' private interests; and 3) although it is typical to apply the state law of the original court to the transferee court when a transfer of venue occurs, this exception to the choice of law rule shall not apply when dealing with a valid forum-selection clause.
Factual Background
The Petitioner, Atlantic Marine Construction Co. (“Atlantic”), a Virginia corporation, has a principal place of business in Virginia. It entered into a contract with the United States Army Corps of Engineers to build a child-development center at Fort Hood, TX. Atlantic subcontracted with J-Crew Management, Inc. (“J-Crew”) to complete the project. The contract between Atlantic and J-Crew contained a forum-selection clause that provided, inter alia, that any disputes between the parties “shall be litigated in the Circuit Court for the City of Norfolk, Virginia, or the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Norfolk Division.” When a dispute regarding payment arose, J-Crew filed an action in the Western District of Texas claiming diversity jurisdiction.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?