Botial v. Ace Navigation Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Botial v. Ace Navigation Co.

271 A.D.2d 373, 707 N.Y.S.2d 825, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4566

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 27, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 271 A.D.2d 373 (Botial v. Ace Navigation Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Botial v. Ace Navigation Co., 271 A.D.2d 373, 707 N.Y.S.2d 825, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4566 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered January 7, 1999, which granted the motion of defendants Ace Navigation Co. and Carnival Corporation/Seacrest Associates (Carnival) to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as forum selection clauses in maritime actions are routinely enforced (see, e.g., Carnival Cruise Lines v Shute, 499 US 585, 595; Marinechance Shipping v Sebastian, 143 F3d 216, cert denied 525 US 1055), we see no obstacle to the enforcement of the Philippines forum selection clause in the contract of employment signed by plaintiff, a Philippine national. Thus, the complaint was properly dismissed.

Having affirmed dismissal of the complaint on this ground, we do not reach the issues of whether the court had jurisdiction or New York was an inconvenient forum. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Tom, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered January 7, 1999, which granted the motion of defendants Ace Navigation Co. and Carnival Corporation/Seacrest Associates (Carnival) to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as forum selection clauses in maritime actions are routinely enforced (see, e.g., Carnival Cruise Lines v Shute, 499 US 585, 595; Marinechance Shipping v Sebastian, 143 F3d 216, cert denied 525 US 1055), we see no obstacle to the enforcement of the Philippines forum selection clause in the contract of employment signed by plaintiff, a Philippine national. Thus, the complaint was properly dismissed.

Having affirmed dismissal of the complaint on this ground, we do not reach the issues of whether the court had jurisdiction or New York was an inconvenient forum. Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Tom, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 373, 707 N.Y.S.2d 825, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/botial-v-ace-navigation-co-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack