§Why CasetextPricing

Global Oil Tools, Inc. v. Expeditors International of Washington, Inc. et al

REPLY to Response to Motion

8 Cited authorities

  1. New Moon Shipping Co. v. Man B & W Diesel AG

    121 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 1997)   Cited 300 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it was error to dismiss case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction based on forum selection clause

  2. In re Rolls Royce Corp.

    775 F.3d 671 (5th Cir. 2014)   Cited 176 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding Atlantic Marine inapplicable to situations involving multiple forum-selection clauses, issuing a writ of mandamus to the district court to reconsider severance and transfer, and noting the importance of conserving judicial resources

  3. SGIC Strategic Global Inv. Capital, Inc. v. Burger King Europe GmbH

    839 F.3d 422 (5th Cir. 2016)   Cited 30 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding ownership interest in contracting party constituted a direct benefit for the purposes of direct-benefits estoppel

  4. Union Steel Am. Co. v. M/V Sanko Spruce

    14 F. Supp. 2d 682 (D.N.J. 1998)   Cited 52 times
    Holding mandatory a forum selection clause reading: "Any dispute arising under this bill of lading shall be decided in the country where the Carrier has his principal place of business, and the law of such country shall apply except as provided elsewhere herein"

  5. Wachovia Bank Nat. Ass'n. v. Encap Golf Holdings

    690 F. Supp. 2d 311 (S.D.N.Y. 2010)   Cited 32 times
    Concluding that "by negative implication, the Third Circuit indicated that if a claim is core, forum selection clauses should not be enforced. . ."

  6. Indus. Print Techs. LLC v. Canon U.S.A., Inc.

    CASE NO. 2:14-cv-00019 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 19, 2014)   Cited 10 times

    CASE NO. 2:14-cv-00019 12-19-2014 INDUSTRIAL PRINT TECHNOLOGIES LLC, Plaintiff, v. CANON U.S.A., INC., and CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA, INC., Defendants. RODNEY GILSTRAP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendants Canon U.S.A., Inc., ("C-USA") and Canon Solutions America, Inc.'s ("CSA") (collectively, the "Canon entities") Motion to Transfer Venue (Dkt. No. 36). The Plaintiff, Industrial Print Technologies LLC ("IPT"), opposes the Motion. For the reasons set

  7. Martin v. Scenic Tours U.S. Inc.

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-15809 SECTION: "G"(3) (E.D. La. Dec. 19, 2018)   Cited 1 times

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-15809 SECTION: "G"(3) 12-19-2018 SHAREN MARTIN v. SCENIC TOURS USA INC. NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ORDER AND REASONS Pending before this Court is Defendants Scenic Tours Europe AG's and MS Emerald Star AG's ("the Movants") "Motion for Summary Judgment." In this litigation, Plaintiff Sharen Martin's ("Plaintiff") claims that Defendants Scenic Tours (USA) Inc., Scenic Tours Europe AG, Couples Cruise, LLC, and MS Emerald Star AG acted negligently

  8. Trafigura Beheer B.V. v. M/T Probo Elk

    266 F. App'x 309 (5th Cir. 2007)   Cited 9 times

    No. 06-20576. July 16, 2007. Stephen Maurice Ryan, Leboeuf, Lamb, Greene MacRae, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellant. William Andrew Durham, Eastham, Watson, Dale Forney, Houston, TX, for Defendants-Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, No. 4:05-CV-378. Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:[fn*] [fn*] Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent