Fair v. Lighthouse Carwash Sys., LLC, et al.
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-01309-COA | |
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 07-17-2007 Opinion Author: CARLTON, J. Holding: Reversed and Remanded |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Contract - Forum selection clause Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., LEE AND MYERS, P.JJ., IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, BARNES, ISHEE AND ROBERTS, JJ. Procedural History: Dismissal Nature of the Case: CIVIL - CONTRACT |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-13-2006 Appealed from: RANKIN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Samac Richardson Disposition: DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION Case Number: 2005-290(R) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | JOHN S. FAIR, JR. |
JOY B. WOLFE
CHARLES E. WINFIELD
|
||
| Appellee: | LIGHTHOUSE CARWASH SYSTEMS, LLC, LIGHTHOUSE CARWASH OF MISSISSIPPI, INC., AND LARRY TAYLOR | P. NELSON SMITH |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Contract - Forum selection clause |
| Summary of the Facts: | John Fair, Jr. and Lighthouse Carwash Systems, LLC and/or Lighthouse Carwash of Mississippi executed a series of contracts each entitled “Site Location Agreement,” the purpose of which was to locate suitable sites within several geographic regions of Mississippi for Lighthouse to establish its carwash operations. The agreements were entered into in Rankin County where Larry Taylor, an Indiana resident acting on behalf of Lighthouse, met with Fair to discuss the business arrangements between Fair and Lighthouse and to finalize the arrangements contractually. The agreements signed by the parties each contained a forum selection provision. A year later, Fair filed an action against Lighthouse and Taylor in the Rankin County Circuit Court alleging that he was fraudulently induced to enter the agreements and to pay certain monies to Lighthouse, which have not been returned to him. The circuit court dismissed Fair’s action for lack of jurisdiction. Fair appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Fair argues that the court erred in dismissing his action based upon a finding that the forum selection provision was mandatory and provided for exclusive jurisdiction and venue in the courts of Indiana. The clause is reviewed to determine whether it is mandatory or permissive in nature. If it is permissive, i.e., if it does not prohibit litigation elsewhere, then the clause is not enforced. If the clause is mandatory, the Court then decides if it is enforceable. The forum selection provision in the instant case fails to include clear, unequivocal language expressly prohibiting litigation in forums other than the one designated in the clause. The language of the clause is open to two opposing, yet reasonable interpretations and should therefore be interpreted against Lighthouse. Since the disputed forum selection clause is permissive in nature, the circuit court erred in dismissing the case and refusing to accept jurisdiction. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
