Magellan Real Estate Investment Trust v. Losch

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that when a forum selection clause is merely permissive, “the standard approach to the issue of forum non conveniens is employed”
• narrowly construing choice of 9 law provision where there were no terms expanding scope to all disputes
• “Arizona 7 courts…would effectuate the intent of parties who drafted a choice of law provision by 8 applying the chosen law to all claims within the scope of the provision.”
• “Arizona courts [] would effectuate the intent of [the] parties who drafted 1 a choice of law provision by applying the chosen law to all claims within the scope of the 2 provision.”
• narrowly construing a choice-of-law 11 clause, which provided an “agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance 12 with the laws of the province of Ontario,” because no terms expanded its scope

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).