In a recent legal update, the New Jersey District Court ruled in favor of enforcing a forum selection clause contained within an employee’s offer letter, leading to the transfer of a retaliation claim from a New Jersey federal court to one in New York. The plaintiff, Michael Saul, was formerly a senior copywriter for the defendant company, Seeking Alpha, a financial information content service.
Sual raised concerns about alleged misleading and false statements he had witnessed marketing employees making about the company. This retaliation claim was transferred from New Jersey to New York following an arguement by the defense that the forum selection clause within Saul’s employment contract was enforceable.
In his ruling, Judge Michael A. Shipp stated that he found the plaintiff’s reliance on the holding of Kubis & Perszyk Assocs., Inc. v. Sun Microsystems, Inc. to be misplaced. This previous case centered around the language concerning uneven bargaining positions. The New Jersey Supreme Court had held in that instance that forum selection clauses in contracts subject to the Franchise Act were presumptively invalid on public policy grounds. However, Shipp noted that such a presumption did not directly apply to this case.
The court’s decision highlights the ever-present complexity surrounding the enforcement of forum selection clauses. The case is a fresh reminder for legal professionals that forum selection clauses, which can play a critical role in dictating the venue and applicable law in future potential disputes, are prima facie valid and in a majority of instances will be accepted by the court.