Southeastern Automotive, Inc. v. Genuine Parts Company et al

Filing 36

ORDER: the court enforces the forum-selection clause and GRANTS defendants' motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) [D.E. 10]. The action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, At lanta Division. Plaintiffs motion to stay the Rule 26(f) conference [D.E. 24] is DISMISSED as moot. Defendants' motion to seal [D.E. 30] is GRANTED. The court has not addressed the other pending motions [D.E. 11, 13, 22]. Signed by Chief Judge James C. Dever III on 7/5/2016. (Jenkins, C.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
WESTERN DIVISION
No. 5:16-CV-130-D

SOUTHEASTERN AUTOMOTIVE, INC., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)

v.

)

ORDER

)
)
)
)
Defendants. )

GENUINE AUTO PARTS COMPANY,
and JOHN MICHAEL RIESS, II,

On April1, 2016, Genuine Auto Parts Company and John Michael Riess, II (collectively
"defendants") moved to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). See [D.E. 10]. In support,
defendants note that Southeastern Automotive, Inc. ("Southeastern Automotive" or "plaintiff'') seeks
relief from (1) Genuine Auto Parts Company for breach of contract (count one), (2) defendants for
fraud in the inducement ·concerning the contract between Southeastern Automotive and Genuine
Auto Parts Company (count two), and (3) defendants for violating the North Carolina Unfair and
Deceptive Trade Practices Act concerning the contract between Southeastern Automotive and
Genuine Auto Parts Company (count three). See [D.E. 10-1] 4--19; cf. Compl. [D.E. 1-1] ~~ 1-77.
Defendants also note that the contract between Genuine Auto Parts Company and Southeastern
Automotive contains a forum-selection clause requiring any claims or disputes between the parties,
'

pertaining, directly or indirectly, to the agreement, the loan documents or any matter arising
therefrom, or the collateral or any other document executed or delivered in connection with the
contract be litigated in the federal court in the Northern District of Georgia or, at the option of

Genuine Auto Parts Company, any state court located in Cobb County or Fulton County, Georgia.
See [D.E. 10-2] 22 (Guaranty Support Agreement§ 33(a)); see also [D.E. 10-1] 9-10 (discussing
similar forum-selection clauses related to the transaction).
On May 2, 2016, plaintiff responded in opposition to defendants' motion to dismiss and
motion to transfer. See [D.E. 20]. On May 19,2016, defendants replied in support of their motion
to transfer. See [D.E. 27].
Southeastern Automotive is a sophisticated business entity and is bound by the contractual
terms that it reached with Genuine Auto Parts Company.

See,~'

Cara' s Notions. Inc. v. Hallmark

Cards. Inc., 140 F.3d 566, 567, 570-71 (4th Cir. 1998); see also Davis v. Davis, 256 N.C. 468,
471-72, 124 S.E.2d 130, 133 (1962); Williams v. Williams, 220 N.C. 806, 809-10, 18 S.E.2d 364,
366 (1942). Moreover, a district court should give a valid forum-selection clause controlling weight
absent "extraordinary circumstances." Atl. Marine Constr. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Court for W. Dist. of
Tex., 134 S. Ct. 568, 575 (2013). Here, the forum-selection clause is valid, and the dispute falls
within the forum-selection clause. Furthermore, no extraordinary circumstances warrant refusing
to enforce the forum-selection clause. See id. at 578-83. Indeed, Southeastern Automotive's
arguments to the contrary are specious. Compare [D.E. 20], with [D.E. 27].
In sum, the court enforces the forum-selection clause and GRANTS defendants' motion to
transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) [D.E. 10]. See Atl. Marine Constr. Co., 134 S. Ct. at
578-83; Jenkins v. Albuquerque Lonestar Freightliner. LLC, 464 F. Supp. 2d 491, 493-94 (E.D.N.C.
2006). The action is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia, Atlanta Division. Plaintiffs motion to stay the Rule 26(f) conference [D.E. 24] is
DISMISSED as moot. Defendants' motion to seal [D.E. 30] is GRANTED. The court has not
addressed the other pending motions [D.E. 11, 13, 22].
2

SO ORDERED. This.£..._ day of July 2016.

3