United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Fort Worth Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JOHN
MCBRYDE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Came on
for consideration the motion by defendants, Brett Del Valle,
PRP Menifee, LLC, and Peninsula Retail Partners V, LLC, to
dismiss on the basis of forum non conveniens. The
court, } having considered the motion, the response, the
reply, the record, and applicable authorities, finds that the
motion should f be denied. I
I.
Background
On
February 13, 2019, plaintiffs, Single Box, L, P. and SB AB
West Loop, L.P. f/k/a SB Finco AB, L.P., initiated this
breach of I contract action in Tarrant County, Texas. Doc. 5
at l.[1] The contract relates to a construction
project in Riverside County, | California, but plaintiffs
filed suit in Tarrant County pursuant I to forum selection
clauses in the contracts. Doc. 17 at 1; Doc. f 18 at 15, 20,
36. On February 25, 2019, plaintiffs initiated nonjudicial
foreclosure against defendants in California. Doc. 17 at 1.
In the following months, third parties filed suit against
plaintiffs and defendants in the Superior Court of Riverside
County, California for damages arising out of the same
construction project. Doc. 18 at 109, 122, 130, 139, 148.
Defendants subsequently removed this action to this court and
moved to dismiss on the basis of forum non
conveniens. Doc. 1; Doc. 16.
II.
Grounds of the Motion
Defendants
allege that dismissal is appropriate under the doctrine of
forum non conveniens because the Superior Court of
Riverside County, California is a more convenient forum than
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Texas. Doc. 17, p. 6. Defendants argue that the forum
selection clauses do not control because (I) plaintiffs
waived the forum selection clauses by initiating foreclosure
in California and (ii) even if plaintiffs did not waive, the
court should still find that private and public factors
outweigh the forum selection clauses. Doc. 17 at 18-21.
III.
Legal
Standards
A
plaintiff's choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.
Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235, 241
(1981) (citations omitted). However, a district court has the
discretion to dismiss under the doctrine of forum non
conveniens when (I) the claims may be heard in an
available and adequate alternative forum and (ii) the balance
of the Gulf Oil public- and private-interest factors
favors dismissal. Id. at 241, 254 n.22. The Gulf
Oil public-interest factors include:
(1) Administrative difficulties arising from congested
courts;
(2) Imposition of jury duty on people of a community
unrelated to the litigation;
(3) Local interest in having localized controversies decided
at home; and
(4} Interest in having the trial of a diversity case in a
forum that is "at home" with the law that ...