Holder v. Burger King Corp., 90-02082
| Decision Date | 05 April 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 90-02082,90-02082 |
| Citation | 576 So.2d 973,16 Fla. L. Weekly 942 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | 16 Fla. L. Weekly 942 Harold D. HOLDER and Vevey Holdings, Inc., Appellants, v. BURGER KING CORPORATION, Tahir Ahmed, Gulfstream Garden, Inc., Gulfstream Dodge, Inc., Gulfstream Liberal, Inc., and Banc One Leasing Corporation, Appellees. |
John F. Rudy, II of Bush Ross Gardner Warren & Rudy, P.A., Tampa, for appellants.
James M. Grippando and T. Joan Lawrence of Steel Hector & Davis, Miami, for appellee Burger King Corp.
Harold Holder and Vevey Holdings, Inc., appeal an order of the circuit court which dismisses their complaint against Burger King and others. We affirm.
The complaint alleges fraud and breach of fiduciary duty in connection with franchise and lease agreements between the parties. Essentially it is contended that the performance of three Burger King restaurants has been far below what was represented at the time of the transactions. Shortly after this action was initiated Burger King filed its own complaint in federal court alleging trademark infringement and asserting claims for amounts due under the agreements. The order of dismissal is predicated upon forum selection clauses contained in the agreements, which specify that any controversies shall be litigated in the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida.
Appellants argue that the circuit court should not have enforced the forum selection clauses "because the agreements themselves were entered into as a result of fraud and misrepresentation," and therefore "each and every clause in the agreements is necessarily procured by fraud." We disagree. When a party seeks to void a forum selection clause on the basis of fraud, it must be demonstrated that the clause itself is the product of fraud. Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co., 417 U.S. 506, 94 S.Ct. 2449, 41 L.Ed.2d 270 (1974); Zions First National Bank v. Allen, 688 F.Supp. 1495 (C.D.Utah 1988); Hoffman v. Burroughs Corp., 571 F.Supp. 545 (N.D.Tex.1982).
This is based on sound policy. Forum selection clauses are agreements by the parties concerning where disputes are to be resolved. A suit for fraud is just one of many disputes that might arise. Absent proof that the forum selection clause is the product of fraud the parties should litigate all claims, including fraud claims, in the agreed on forum. Zions First National Bank, 688 F.Supp. at 1499.
The case of First Pacific Corp. v. Sociedade de...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Golden Palm Hospitality, Inc. v. STEARNS BANK NATL. ASS'N
...must be the product of fraud. Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co., 417 U.S. 506, 94 S.Ct. 2449, 41 L.Ed.2d 270 (1974); Holder v. Burger King Corp., 576 So.2d 973 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); First Pac. Corp. v. Sociedade de Empreendimentos e Construcoes, Ltda., 566 So.2d 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (holding that ......
-
Bombardier Capital Inc. v. Progressive Marketing Group, Inc.
...clause on the basis of fraud, it must be demonstrated that the clause itself is the product of fraud." Holder v. Burger King Corp., 576 So.2d 973, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Alternatively, "[t]he fraud complained of must relate to the inclusion of the clause in the contract." First Pac. Corp. ......
-
Walker v. Trust
...itself is the product of the fraud or that the fraud caused the inclusion of the clause in the agreement.”); Holder v. Burger King Corp., 576 So.2d 973, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (“Absent proof that the forum selection clause is the product of fraud the parties should litigate all claims, incl......
-
SAI Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Applied Systems, Inc., 1D03-102C.
...the product of fraud the parties should litigate all claims, including fraud claims, in the agreed on forum." Holder v. Burger King Corp., 576 So.2d 973, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). Here, SAI does not directly complain that the forum clause itself was secured by fraud, nor does it seek to avoid......