Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility
Home / Opinion Digests / Contract / Contract — Civil Practice – Venue – Forum Selection Clause – Parties’ Residences

Contract — Civil Practice – Venue – Forum Selection Clause – Parties’ Residences

A&D Environmental Services, Inc. v. Miller (Lawyers Weekly No. 15-07-0298, 7 pp.) (Chris Dillon, J.) Appealed from Guilford County Superior Court (Richard Doughton, J.) N.C. App.

Holding: Even though the parties’ contract says any related litigation must be brought in Mecklenburg County, since defendant lives in Orange County, and since plaintiff is a domestic corporation with its principal place of business in Guilford County, venue is proper in Guilford County.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of defendant’s motion to dismiss for improper venue.

According to Gaither v. Charlotte Motor Car Co., 182 N.C. 498, 109 S.E. 362 (1921), as distinguished in Perkins v. CCH Computax, Inc., 333 N.C. 140, 143, 423 S.E.2d 780, 782 (1992), parties may not strip our legislature of its power to determine in which county or counties actions maintained in this state must be prosecuted. A forum selection clause which requires lawsuits to be prosecuted in a certain North Carolina county is enforceable only if our legislature has provided that said North Carolina county is a proper venue.

In this case, our legislature has provided that this contract dispute “must be tried in the county in which the [plaintiff] or [defendant] … reside[s].” G.S. § 1-82.

The record indicates that defendant is a resident of Orange County and that plaintiff is a resident of Guilford County. There is no indication that plaintiff is a resident – for venue purposes – of Mecklenburg County. Therefore, venue is proper in Guilford County.

Affirmed.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*