17 Cited authorities

Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc.
39 Cal.4th 384 (Cal. 2006) Cited 283 times 2 Legal Analyses
Concluding party failed to present sufficient evidence of justifiable reliance to support fraud claim based on alleged promise of long term employment where party signed letter stating employment was at will and terminable at any time
Rowe v. Exline
153 Cal.App.4th 1276 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 137 times
Holding nonsignatories entitled to compel signatory to arbitrate under equitable estoppel when signatory’s claims are inherently inseparable from or intertwined with arbitrable claims
Stangvik v. Shiley Inc.
54 Cal.3d 744 (Cal. 1991) Cited 193 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding the private interests of the parties favored trial in Scandinavia, in part reasoning: "It is true that much, but not all, of the evidence concerning liability exists in California; but virtually all the evidence relating to damages is in Scandinavia," footnote omitted
People v. Bouzas
53 Cal.3d 467 (Cal. 1991) Cited 195 times
Finding legislative acquiescence where Legislature amended the relevant statutes "at least 10 times between 1903 and 1976 without altering the courts’ consistent interpretation" of the provisions at issue
Intershop Communications v. Superior Court
104 Cal.App.4th 191 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002) Cited 119 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that " forum selection clause within an adhesion contract will be enforced as long as the clause provided adequate notice to the party that he was agreeing to the jurisdiction cited in the contract."
Verdugo v. Alliantgroup, L.P.
237 Cal.App.4th 141 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) Cited 74 times 5 Legal Analyses
Stating that stipulation as to unwaivable rights may alter transfer analysis
Burdette v. Carrier Corp.
158 Cal.App.4th 1668 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 74 times 2 Legal Analyses
Affirming finding of collateral estoppel with less than full record of prior proceeding
Guimei v. General Electric Co.
172 Cal.App.4th 689 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 59 times
Finding that where defendants were not California-based corporations, the state "has little interest in keeping the litigation in this state to deter future wrongful conduct"
Berg v. MTC Electronics Technologies Co.
61 Cal.App.4th 349 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) Cited 76 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding the following clause permissive: "'The company [MTC] has expressly submitted to the jurisdiction of the State of California and United States Federal courts sitting in the City of Los Angeles, California, for the purpose of any suit, action or proceedings arising out of this Offering.'"
Roman v. Liberty University, Inc.
162 Cal.App.4th 670 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 42 times
Rejecting claim Virginia not “suitable alternative forum ... because [it] applies contributory, rather than comparative, negligence principles, and plaintiff's own negligence or assumption of the risk would completely bar his recovery”

Reply

17 Cited authorities

Concluding party failed to present sufficient evidence of justifiable reliance to support fraud claim based on alleged promise of long term employment where party signed letter stating employment was at will and terminable at any time

Holding nonsignatories entitled to compel signatory to arbitrate under equitable estoppel when signatory’s claims are inherently inseparable from or intertwined with arbitrable claims

Holding the private interests of the parties favored trial in Scandinavia, in part reasoning: "It is true that much, but not all, of the evidence concerning liability exists in California; but virtually all the evidence relating to damages is in Scandinavia," footnote omitted

Finding legislative acquiescence where Legislature amended the relevant statutes "at least 10 times between 1903 and 1976 without altering the courts’ consistent interpretation" of the provisions at issue

Holding that " forum selection clause within an adhesion contract will be enforced as long as the clause provided adequate notice to the party that he was agreeing to the jurisdiction cited in the contract."

Stating that stipulation as to unwaivable rights may alter transfer analysis

Affirming finding of collateral estoppel with less than full record of prior proceeding

Finding that where defendants were not California-based corporations, the state "has little interest in keeping the litigation in this state to deter future wrongful conduct"

Finding the following clause permissive: "'The company [MTC] has expressly submitted to the jurisdiction of the State of California and United States Federal courts sitting in the City of Los Angeles, California, for the purpose of any suit, action or proceedings arising out of this Offering.'"

Rejecting claim Virginia not “suitable alternative forum ... because [it] applies contributory, rather than comparative, negligence principles, and plaintiff's own negligence or assumption of the risk would completely bar his recovery”