THE STEWART ORGANIZATION, INC., A CORPORATION; WALTER H. STEWART, AND JAMES S. SNOW, JR., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES,
v.
RICOH CORPORATION, A CORPORATION, RICOH OF AMERICA, INC., A CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court affirmed the Eleventh Circuit's reversal of the district court's denial of a motion to transfer, remanding for determination of the forum-selection clause's effect under federal law.
Stewart Organization sued Ricoh Corporation for breach of contract, but the agreement contained a forum-selection clause requiring suits in Manhattan.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Improper Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
Stewart Organization, Inc., an Alabama corporation, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama against Ricoh Corporation, alleging that it had breached a dealership agreement between the two. The agreement’s forum-selection clause provided that any contractual dispute be brought only in a court located in Manhattan, New York City, New York. Ricoh moved the district court to either transfer the case to the Southern District of New York, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1404(a), or dismiss the suit for improper venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 1406. The district court denied the motion.
A divided panel of this Court reversed the district court, and remanded the case with instructions to the district court to transfer the case to the appropriate Manhattan court. Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 779 F. 2d 643 (11th Cir.1986). Rehearing in banc was granted and the panel opinion was vacated. 785 F. 2d 896 (1986). The in banc Court reversed the district court and remanded with instructions' to transfer this action to an appropriate court in the Borough of Manhattan in the City of New York. 810 F. 2d 1066, 1071 (1987).
The Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari, Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 225, 98 L.Ed.2d 184 (1987), and affirmed “the Eleventh Circuit order reversing the district court’s application of Alabama law.” Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., — U.S. -, -, 108 S.Ct. 2239, 2245-2246, 101 L.Ed.2d 22 (1988). The Supreme Court remanded the case “so that the District Court may determine in the first instance the appropriate effect under federal law of the parties’ forum-selection clause on respondent’s section 1404(a) motion.” Id.
This case is hereby remanded to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama for further proceedings in keeping with the decision of the Supreme Court.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Opinion on remand, D.C., 696 F.Supp. 583.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Berman v. Cunard Line, Ltd., 771 F. Supp. 1175 (S.D. Fla. 1991)…eme Court in Stewart Organization, Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 810 F.2d 1066 (11th Cir.1987), cert. granted, 484 U.S. 894, 108 S.Ct. 225, 98 L.Ed.2d 184, affirmed and remanded, 487 U.S. 22, 108 S.Ct. 2239, 101 L.Ed.2d 22, on remand, 855 F.2d 762, on remand, 696 F.Supp. 583, mandamus granted, In re Ricoh Corp., 870 F.2d 570, rehearing denied, 877 F.2d 975. In Stewart Organization, Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 487 U.S. 22, 108 S.Ct. 2239, 101 L.Ed.2d 22 (1988), the Supreme…
Authorities Cited
- Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 487 U.S. 22 (U.S. 1988)
- The Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 810 F.2d 1066 (11th Cir. 1987)
- The Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 779 F.2d 643 (11th Cir. 1986)
- The Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 785 F.2d 896 (11th Cir. 1986)