PropSF, LLC v. Armstrong Marine, Inc.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS (SIC) MOTION FOR DISMISSAL FOR IMPROPER VENUE by Judge Robert J. Bryan. (TC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
CASE NO. 3:17-cv-05443-RJB
ARMSTRONG MARINE, INC.,
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
(SIC) MOTION FOR DISMISSAL
FOR IMPROPER VENUE
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Dismissal for Improper
Venue (Dkt. 7). The motion is mislabeled. It is brought by Defendant, not Plaintiff.
The Court is fully advised and is familiar with the records and files herein.
Leaving aside the various side issues, this dispute narrows down to the enforceability of
¶12 of a purchase and sale agreement executed by the parties (Dkt. 8-1). The subject provision is
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S (SIC) MOTION FOR DISMISSAL FOR IMPROPER VENUE - 1
Purchaser and Seller agree that the laws of the State of Washington shall govern this
Purchase and Sale Agreement. Both parties hereby consent to venue in and jurisdiction of
Clallam County Superior Court should any dispute arise.
Dkt. 8-1 at 3.
By its language this clause is not an agreement for exclusive venue and jurisdiction in
Clallam County Superior Court. It is consent to venue and jurisdiction there should one of the
parties bring suit there. The consent language is not mandatory like the first sentence of the
paragraph, which, employing the word “shall,” fixes the body of law that applies to the
The jurisdiction and venue clause in ¶12 does not require exclusive jurisdiction and
venue in Clallam County. The motion (Dkt. 7) is HEREBY DENIED.
It is so ordered.
The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and
to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.
Dated this 11th day of August, 2017.
ROBERT J. BRYAN
United States District Judge
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S (SIC) MOTION FOR DISMISSAL FOR IMPROPER VENUE - 2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?