§Why CasetextPricing

Russ McCullough et al v. World Wrestling Entertainment Inc

OPPOSITION to MOTION to Transfer Case to U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut 16

34 Cited authorities

  1. Atl. Marine Constr. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for the W. Dist. of Tex.

    571 U.S. 49 (2013)   Cited 3,674 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the correct procedural mechanism for enforcement of an FSC specifying a foreign forum is through a motion to dismiss for FNC

  2. Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp.

    487 U.S. 22 (1988)   Cited 4,868 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal law determines the validity of a forum selection clause

  3. The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.

    407 U.S. 1 (1972)   Cited 4,535 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts should enforce a choice-of-law clause when it is part of a "freely negotiated private international agreement"

  4. Van Dusen v. Barrack

    376 U.S. 612 (1964)   Cited 4,627 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "change of venue under § 1404 generally should be, with respect to state law, but a change of courtrooms"

  5. Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 83 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 1,745 times   45 Legal Analyses
    Holding unilateral arbitration provision substantively unconscionable

  6. Murphy v. Schneider Nat'l, Inc.

    349 F.3d 1224 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 664 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in the absence of factual findings made by the district court based upon an evidentiary hearing, affidavits and other evidence submitted by the non-moving party in the context of a Rule 12(b) challenge are to be viewed in the light most favorable to that party

  7. Cheshire Mortgage Service, Inc. v. Montes

    223 Conn. 80 (Conn. 1992)   Cited 383 times
    Holding that plaintiff mortgage servicer's violation of Truth in Lending Act and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36-224 amounted to violation of CUTPA because although violations were not immoral, unethical, oppressive, or unscrupulous, they "offend[ed] public policy so as to amount to an established concept of unfairness" and together constituted substantial injury

  8. Stirlen v. Supercuts, Inc.

    51 Cal.App.4th 1519 (Cal. Ct. App. 1997)   Cited 324 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the element of procedural unconscionability is established where the challenged clause is part of a contract of adhesion

  9. Flores v. Transamerica HomeFirst, Inc.

    93 Cal.App.4th 846 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 219 times
    Holding that generic arbitration clauses contained in loan agreement and deed of trust constituted a contract of adhesion because offered without opportunity for negotiation

  10. A & M Produce Co. v. FMC Corp.

    135 Cal.App.3d 473 (Cal. Ct. App. 1982)   Cited 371 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding unconscionable a disclaimer of warranties under the Uniform Commercial Code where there was "allocation of commercial risks in a socially or economically unreasonable manner"

  11. Section 1404 - Change of venue

    28 U.S.C. § 1404   Cited 28,373 times   184 Legal Analyses
    Granting Class Plaintiffs' motion to transfer action in order to "facilitate a unified settlement approval process together with the class action cases in" In re Amex ASR

  12. Section 101 - Definitions

    17 U.S.C. § 101   Cited 6,344 times   174 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the United States' adherence to provisions of the Berne Convention of 1886

  13. Section 1670.5 - Contract or clause unconscionable

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1670.5   Cited 760 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Adopting UCC section 2-302 and making it generally applicable to all contracts