10 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2024 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
CELISTICS, LLC v. Gonzalezgreen2 sentences2022See Steiner Transocean Ltd. v. Efremova, 109 So. 3d 871, 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (recognizing that a trial court is permitted to consider evidence outside the four corners of the complaint where the motion to dismiss is based on a contractual forum selection clause); see also Weisser v. PNC Bank, N.A., 967 So. 2d 327, 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“[I]n Florida, contracting parties are permitted to agree that any litigation stemming from their contract must be heard in a specific forum.”); Celistics, LLC v. Gonzalez, 22 So. 3d 824, 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (determining that the subject forum selection 2013Likewise, “[a]s the trial court’s order denying [appellant’s] motion to dismiss is based on the interpretation of the contractual forum selection clause, this Court’s standard of review is de novo.” Celistics, LLC v. Gonzalez, 22 So.3d 824, 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). | 4 | 4 |
Weisser v. PNC BANK, NAgreen2 sentences2022See Steiner Transocean Ltd. v. Efremova, 109 So. 3d 871, 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (recognizing that a trial court is permitted to consider evidence outside the four corners of the complaint where the motion to dismiss is based on a contractual forum selection clause); see also Weisser v. PNC Bank, N.A., 967 So. 2d 327, 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“[I]n Florida, contracting parties are permitted to agree that any litigation stemming from their contract must be heard in a specific forum.”); Celistics, LLC v. Gonzalez, 22 So. 3d 824, 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (determining that the subject forum selection 2011See Celistics, LLC v. Gonzalez, 22 So.3d 824, 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Weisser v. PNC Bank, N.A., 967 So.2d 327, 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). | 2 | 2 |
Orlovsky v. Solid Surf, Inc.green1 sentence2024“It is well established that ‘parties may provide by their agreement where suit may be brought to enforce it.’” Pocock v. Pocock, 360 So. 3d 1219 , 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (quoting Interval Mktg. merely by reason of his official character; he is not liable for torts committed by or for the corporation unless he has participated in the wrong.” (quoting Orlovsky v. Solid Surf, Inc., 405 So. 2d 1363, 1364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981))). 3 Assocs., Inc. v. Sea Club Assocs. | 1 | 1 |
Rhines v. Stategreen1 sentence2023Carnival Corp. v. Garcia, 237 So. 3d 1110, 1113 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“As the trial court's order denying Carnival's motion to dismiss was based on the interpretation of the contractual forum selection clause, this Court's standard of review is de novo”). | 1 | 1 |
Steiner Transocean Ltd v. Efremovagreen2 sentences2022See Steiner Transocean Ltd. v. Efremova, 109 So. 3d 871, 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (recognizing that a trial court is permitted to consider evidence outside the four corners of the complaint where the motion to dismiss is based on a contractual forum selection clause); see also Weisser v. PNC Bank, N.A., 967 So. 2d 327, 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“[I]n Florida, contracting parties are permitted to agree that any litigation stemming from their contract must be heard in a specific forum.”); Celistics, LLC v. Gonzalez, 22 So. 3d 824, 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (determining that the subject forum selection 2022See Steiner Transocean Ltd. v. Efremova, 109 So. 3d 871, 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (recognizing that a trial court is permitted to consider evidence outside the four corners of the complaint where the motion to dismiss is based on a contractual forum selection clause); see also Weisser v. PNC Bank, N.A., 967 So. 2d 327, 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (“[I]n Florida, contracting parties are permitted to agree that any litigation stemming from their contract must be heard in a specific forum.”); Celistics, LLC v. Gonzalez, 22 So. 3d 824, 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (determining that the subject forum selection | 1 | 1 |
TECO Barge Line, Inc. v. Hagangreen1 sentence2012TECO Barge Line, Inc. v. Hagan, 15 So.3d 863, 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Bombardier Capital Inc. v. Progressive Mktg. | 1 | 1 |
DVDPlay, Inc. v. DVD 123 LLCgreen1 sentence2009See Weisser v. PNC Bank, N.A., 967 So.2d 827, 830 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); DVDPlay, Inc. v. DVD 123 LLC, 930 So.2d 816, 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Regal Kitchens, Inc. v. O’Connor & Taylor Condo. | 1 | 1 |
Three Seas Corp. v. FFE TRANSP. SERVICESgreen1 sentence2006Servs., Inc., 913 So.2d 72, 74-75 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)(holding that the defense of improper venue based on a contractual forum selection clause is waived if not pled with particularity in responsive pleading or, if made by motion, "before pleading if a further pleading is permitted")(quoting Fla. R. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
McRae v. JD/MD, Inc.
green
1 sentence1992McRae v. J.D./M.D., Inc., 511 So.2d 540 (Fla. 1987). | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.