1250 Oceanside Partners v. Maryl Group, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff-Appellant 1250 Oceanside Partners appeals an order granting Defendant-Appellee Maryl Group, Inc.’s motion to dismiss for improper venue. We reverse. Because the parties are familiar with the history of the case, we need not recount it here.
The district court erred when it enforced a purported forum selection clause in a land sale contract between the parties. That clause allowed Oceanside to judicially foreclose on “property covered by the Mortgage” in the event of a default by Maryl. Specifically and critically, the contract provided that Oceanside “may seek to foreclose on the property ... by a foreclosure action filed in the Circuit Court of the Third Circuit, State of Hawaii[.]” That clause, the district court held, prevented Oceanside from bringing a foreclosure action in Hawaii’s federal bankruptcy court.
We enforce only those forum selection clauses that “contain language that clearly designates a forum as the exclusive one.” N. Cal. Dist. Council of Laborers v. Pittsburg-Des Moines Steel Co., 69 F.3d 1034 , 1037 (9th Cir. 1995). We found such language lacking in Northern California District Council of Laborers and in Hunt Wesson Foods, Inc. v.…