Calisher & Associates, Inc. v. Rgcm, LLC

MEMORANDUM

The district court remanded these cases to the Los Angeles Superior Court after finding that the contracts at issue selected that court as the exclusive forum for the parties’ dispute. We affirm.

We have jurisdiction to hear defendants’ appeals from the district court’s remand order. See Kamm v. ITEX Corp., 568 F.3d 752, 757 (9th Cir.2009). Federal law governs the enforceability of forum selection clauses in cases removed on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. See Manetti-Farrow, Inc. v. Gucci Am., Inc., 858 F.2d 509 , 513 (9th Cir.1988). We review de novo the district court’s interpretation of a forum selection clause. See Hunt Wesson Foods, Inc. v. Supreme Oil Co., 817 F.2d 75, 77 (9th Cir.1987).

The clause — stating that “litigation shall be subject to the laws and Rules of Evidence of the state of California with the venue being Los Angeles County Superior Court” — requires that claims arising from the contract be litigated in the Los Ange-les County Superior Court. “This language requires enforcement of the clause because [defendants] not only consented to the jurisdiction of the state courts of [California], but further agreed by mandatory language that the…