Gonzalez v. Bowie

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that courts should consider the forum “that is most familiar with the governing law”
• holding that we review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a)
• holding that a provision in a franchise agreement “that requires a California franchisee to resolve claims related to the franchise agreement in a non-California court [6] directly contravenes [California’s] strong public policy”
• holding that California code “§ 20040.5 expresses a strong public policy of the State of California to protect California franchisees from the expense, inconvenience, and possible prejudice of litigating in a non-California venue”
• holding that California code “§ 20040.5 expresses a strong public policy of the State of California to protect California franchisees from the expense, inconvenience, and possible prejudice of litigating in a non-California venue”
• noting that defendant failed 24 to meet burden of showing that the alternative forum was more 25 appropriate

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).