Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
211 F.3d 495 (2000)
Jones (plaintiff) operated a General Nutrition Store in California under a franchise agreement with GNC (defendant) that included a Pennsylvania choice-of-law clause and a forum-selection clause restricting suits to Pennsylvania. After a dispute over the store's construction and operation, Jones sued GNC in California state court; GNC removed to federal court and moved to dismiss or transfer venue to Pennsylvania. The district court denied transfer, finding the forum-selection clause unenforceable and concluding California was the more appropriate forum given the parties' connections, negotiations, Jones's chosen forum, and relative litigation costs. GNC appealed.
Whether a federal court may refuse to transfer venue, despite the parties' prior agreement to a particular forum, if transfer would violate a strong public policy and the current forum is, on balance, convenient and fair.