Belton v. Borg & Ide Imaging, P.C.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the “presence of a forum-selection clause . . . will be a significant factor that figures centrally in the district court's calculus” when considering a motion to transfer”
• recognizing that no single factor is dispositive in transfer analysis
• noting that the issue of whether to apply a federal statute such as Section 1404 “involves a considerably less intricate analysis than that which governs the ‘relatively unguided Erie choice’ ”
• explaining that a court evaluating a motion to transfer based on a forum-selection clause may not consider private interest factors because the parties have waived any objections to the pre-selected forum
• holding “that federal law, specifically 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), governs the District Court's decision whether to give effect to the parties' forum-selection clause and transfer this case,” despite Alabama’s statute hostile to forum selection clauses
• quoting, in turn, Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612, 622, 84 S.Ct. 805, 11 L.Ed.2d 945 (1964)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).