Fornaro v. RMC/Resource Mgt

2004 DNH 151

• Court: District Court, D. New Hampshire
• Decided: October 13, 2004
• Docket: CV-04-85-PB
• Status: Published

Opinion

Fornaro v. RMC/Resource Mgt CV-04-85-PB 10/13/04

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Rex Fornaro

v. Civil N o . 04-85-PB Opinion N o . 2004 DNH 151 RMC/Resources Management Company, LLC

O R D E R

Rex Fornaro has filed a diversity of citizenship claim for

interference with a contractual relationship against RMC/Resource

Management Company, LLC. Fornaro asserts that RMC interfered

with the contractual relationship he had with his attorney in the

case of Fornaro v . Gannon, N o . 00-189-B (D.N.H.) RMC moves to

dismiss on the ground that venue lies exclusively in the Carroll

County, New Hampshire Superior Court based on a forum selection

clause that is contained in a contract between Fornaro and RMC.

The clause in question states that “[t]he jurisdiction of any

lawsuits related to or arising out of this contract will be in

the courts of Carroll County, New Hampshire.” I agree with RMC that this case is subject to the forum

selection clause. The contract that contains the clause

obligated RMC to partially fund the litigation of Fornaro’s

claims in Fornaro v . Gannon, N o . 00-189-B (D.N.H.). Fornaro’s

current claim plainly arises out of the underlying contract

because it is based in part on RMC’s unwillingness to continue to

fund the litigation in accordance with the contract. The

contract’s forum selection clause is mandatory rather than

permissive because it states that “the jurisdiction will be in

the courts of Carroll County, New Hampshire” (emphasis added).

Moreover, it would not be unfair to require Fornaro’s claim to be

litigated in Carroll County, New Hampshire, because there is

already a lawsuit pending between the parties in that County over

which the court has determined that it has jurisdiction. See

RMC/Resource Management Company, LLC v . Fornaro, Carroll County

Superior Court, N o . 03-C-073 (N.H. Sup. C t . ) . Therefore, under

either New Hampshire or federal law, the forum selection clause

requires this claim to be litigated in state court. See, e.g.,

Silva v . Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., 239 F.3d 385 (1st Cir.

2001); Strafford Technology, Inc. v . Camcar Division of Textron,

Inc., 147 N.H. 174 (N.H. 2001).

-2- Defendants’ motion to dismiss (doc. n o . 21) is granted. All

other pending motions are denied as moot.

SO ORDERED.

Paul Barbadoro Chief Judge

October 1 3 , 2004

cc: Rex Fornaro, pro se Eugene Sullivan, Esq.

-3-