Nextrade, Inc. v. Hyosung (America), Inc.

Good Law
122 F. App'x 892
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 14, 2005No. 03-57151; D.C. No. CV-03-01397-GLTCalifornia856 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiffs appeal a district court order granting Defendant’s Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(3) motion to dismiss for improper forum. Because the exclusive distributorship agreement between the parties contained a forum selection clause designating that any disputes regarding the agreement be litigated in the Seoul District Court, Western Division, and because Plaintiffs’ wrongful termination claim sufficiently relates to the interpretation of the agreement, we affirm.

A court deciding a Rule 12(b)(3) motion must draw all reasonable inferences and resolve all factual disputes in favor of the non-moving party or, in the alternative, may hold an evidentiary hearing. See Murphy v. Schneider Nat’l, Inc., 362 F.3d 1133 , 1137-39 (9th Cir.2004). However, the pleadings need not be accepted as true. Id. at 1137.

State law governs questions of contract formation. See, e.g., Chateau des Charmes Wines Ltd. v. Sabate USA Inc., 328 F.3d 528, 530 (noting that contract formation is a substantive issue and citing with accord First and Second Circuit application of state law to contract issues). Under California Com.Code § 2207(1), there is a valid agreement between the parties. See Aronowicz…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.