The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
IN THE MATTER OF LEBEOUF CIVIL ACTION
BROS. TOWING, LLC
VERSUS
DANIEL GOSS NO.:20-00159-BAJ-EWD
RULING AND ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff, LeBeouf Bros. Towing, LLC’s Motion to
Transfer Venue (Doc. 4) requesting the Court to transfer this matter to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District. No opposition to the motion has
been filed by the Claimant. For the reasons stated herein, the Motion to Transfer
Venue (Doc. 4) is GRANTED.
I. BACKGROUND
On November 21, 2019, Claimant Daniel Goss filed suit against Plaintiff in the
Nineteenth Judicial District Court of East Baton Rouge Parish to recover for an
alleged personal injury sustained while working for Plaintiff as a pilot on board the
M/V Dickie Gonsoulin. On March 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed this complaint seeking
limitation and a declaratory judgment action.1 Plaintiff asks the Court to transfer
1 Plaintiff filed his limitation complaint in the Middle District of Louisiana to comply with Rule F of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which requires a vessel owner to file the Limitation Complaint
in the district in which the owner has been sued. See Rule F (9).
this matter pursuant to a forum selection clause agreed to by the parties. Plaintiff
contends that Claimant knowingly and voluntarily agreed to the forum selection
clause contained within an applicant certification that requires that any claims be
filed in the Eastern District of Louisiana. Plaintiff further contends that the forum
selection clause is valid and enforceable; thus, the Court should transfer this matter.
II. LEGAL STANDARD
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), “a district court may transfer any civil action to any
other district or division where it might have been brought or to any district or
division to which all parties have consented.” A forum selection clause may be
enforced by a §1404(a) motion to transfer. Atlantic Marine Const. Co. v. U.S. Dist.
Court for the Western Dist. Of Texas, 571 U.S. 49, 134 S.Ct. 568 (2013).
In a typical case not involving a forum selection clause, a district court
considering a §1404(a) motion to transfer must evaluate both the convenience of the
parties and various public-interest considerations. Id. at 62. The district court must
weigh the relevant factors and decide if a transfer would serve the convenience of the
parties and witnesses, as well as the interest of justice. See Id. at 63. However, the
presence of a valid forum selection clause requires district courts to adjust the
§1404(a) analysis in the following three ways: (1) the Plaintiff’s choice of forum merits
no weight; (2) the court should not consider arguments about the parties’ private
interests; and (3) when a party bound by a forum selection clause flouts its
contractual obligation and files suit in a different forum, a § 1404(a) transfer of venue
will not carry with it the original venue's choice-of-law rules—a factor that in some
circumstances may affect public-interest considerations. Id.
The court may consider arguments about public-interest factors only. See Id.
at 64 (emphasis added). 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.” M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1, 10, 92 S.Ct.
1907 (1972).
III. DISCUSSION
Plaintiff asserts that Claimant knowingly and voluntarily entered into a
forum-selection agreement requiring any suit arising from his employment with
Plaintiff to be filed in the Eastern District of Louisiana. (Doc. 4-1 at p. 3). Plaintiff
has attached a copy of the forum selection clause with Claimant’s signature, which
states “ I agree that any and all disputes, claims, causes of action, or lawsuits against
my employer and/or the owner of any vessel to which I am assigned (including any
personal injuries arising out of my employment) shall be filed exclusively in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.” See Doc. 4-2,
Exhibit A.
Forum selection clauses in admiralty cases are presumptively valid and
enforceable. Calix-Chacon v. Global International Marine, Inc., 493 F.3d 507,512 (5th
Cir. 2007) (citing M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.¸ 407 U.S. 1 (1972). Forum
selection clauses are invalid if enforcement would be unreasonable, unjust,
fraudulent, or overreaching. See M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1, 15
(1972). The party attacking enforceability may overcome the presumption of validity
by showing that the clause is unreasonable under the circumstances. Id. at 10.
Unreasonableness potentially exists where: (1) the incorporation of the forum
selection clause into the agreement was the product of fraud or overreaching; (2) the
party seeking to escape enforcement “will for all purposes be deprived of his day in
court” because of the grave inconvenience or unfairness of the selected forum; (3) the
fundamental unfairness of the chosen law will deprive the plaintiff of a remedy; or
(4) enforcement of the forum selection clause would contravene a strong public policy
of the forum state. Haynsworth v. The Corporation, 121 F.3d 956, 963 (5th Cir. 1997).
The Court finds that Claimant did not overcome the presumption of validity
because he did not object to this motion. The Court also finds that enforcement of the
clause would not be unreasonable, unjust, fraudulent, or overreaching. Enforcement
of the clause would transfer the case to a forum that Claimant could have selected
because it is the Plaintiff’s domicile; therefore, there is no grave inconvenience or
unfairness in the selected forum that would deprive Claimant of his day in court.
Lastly, enforcement of the clause would not contravene a strong public policy of the
forum state. Thus, the Court finds that the forum selection clause signed by Claimant
is valid and enforceable.
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Transfer Venue (Doc. 4) is
GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 30th day of April, 2020
_______________________________________
JUDGE BRIAN A. JACKSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA