The Fifth Circuit US Court of Appeals recently agreed that a claim brought by a former sea captain, Marek Matthews, against his former employers, Tidewater Crewing, Ltd. and Tidewater Inc. (collectively, Tidewater), for alleged exposure to toxic chemicals should be litigated in England, not the US. How did this happen?

Matthews, a Florida resident, initially brought suit in Louisiana State Court, but the case was removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Tidewater then moved to dismiss the case on the basis of inconvenient location, or forum non conveniens. The District Court granted the motion, dismissing Matthews’ claims, finding that Matthews’ employment contract contained a valid and enforceable forum-selection clause requiring litigation in England.

Matthews appealed to the Fifth Circuit arguing that the forum selection clause was unreasonable under the circumstances. Specifically, he argued that requiring suit be filed in England (1) deprived him of his day in court due to the grave inconvenience or unfairness of the selected forum and (2) enforcement of the forum selection clause contravenes a strong public policy of the forum state, Louisiana.

Matthews argued that his diagnoses of stage 4 cancer created a grave inconvenience of litigating in England. The Fifth Circuit held that Mr. Matthews’ health, although serious, did not give him the right to bring suit in Louisiana. Somewhat heartlessly, the Court noted that modern technologies would allow Matthews to litigate in a foreign forum,  and that his physical and health limitations do not render the forum-selection clause unreasonable under the circumstances.

Matthews also argued that the forum selection clause contravened Louisiana public policy and statutory law. Specifically, he pointed to Supreme Court precedent which states, a forum-selection “clause should be held unenforceable if enforcement would contravene a strong public policy of the forum in which suit is brought, whether declared by statute or by judicial decision.” M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1, 15 (1972).  Matthews also argued that a Louisiana statute voids a forum selection clause unless expressly agreed to after the occurrence of the incident made the subject of litigation. See La. R.S. § 23:921A (2). As Matthews did not agree to the forum-selection clause after the onset of his health condition, he argued that under Louisiana law, the clause was null and void.

Considering both state and federal public policy, the Fifth Circuit held that even though the forum selection clause contravenes Louisiana law, that law was not intended to protect Matthews and even if it did, federal law would dictate a different outcome. The Court noted that Matthews was not the object of the Louisiana statute, as the statue was designed to protect Louisiana citizens from litigating their cases in a foreign forum, and Matthews is a citizen of Florida. In addition, the Court noted that under federal public policy, forum selection clauses in admiralty cases are presumptively valid and enforceable.

The attorneys in our Austin and Dallas offices have significant experience interpreting and litigating contracts. Please contact us at info@gstexlaw.com with any questions or comments you may have.

Legal Disclaimers

This blog is made available by Gerstle Snelson, LLP for educational purposes and to provide general information about the law, only.  Neither this document nor the information contained in it is intended to constitute legal advice on any specific matter or of a general nature.  Use of the blog does not create an attorney-client relationship with Gerstle Snelson, LLP where one does not already exist with the firm.  This blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney.

©Gerstle Snelson, LLP 2024.  All rights reserved.  Any authorized reprint or use of this material is prohibited.  No part of this blog may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage or retrieval system without the express written permission of Gerstle Snelson, LLP.