The court said “forum selection clauses ‘are prima facie valid and should be enforced unless enforcement is shown by the resisting party to be ‘unreasonable’ under the circumstances.’” This determination relies on a four-prong test. Facebook must demonstrate that the clause was “reasonably communicated” to the other party, the clause was mandatory, and the clause applies to the other party. “If these requirements are met, the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to rebut the presumption of enforceability by making a sufficiently strong showing that enforcement would be unreasonable or unjust, or that the clause was invalid for such reasons as fraud or overreaching.”
The court added that it is plaintiffs’ burden to “‘rebut the presumption’ that the forum selection clause is enforceable.” However, the plaintiffs “do not even attempt to make such a showing[, nor] could they, for the reasons set forth in Defendants’ memorandum of law.” Thus, the court states that the plaintiffs’ agreement with defendants will be held and the case will be transferred to their agreed venue.
Plaintiffs are represented by John DeMaio. Defendants are represented by Pincus Law LLC.