BYD Sports, LLC and BYD Management, LLC v. Don King, Don King Productions, Inc., Doe Corporations 1-10, Doe Beneficiaries 1-10

Summary

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York holds that venue is improper in the district because no defendant resides there and a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims did not occur there. The court rejects plaintiffs’ arguments based on judicial estoppel, a forum-selection clause, and alleged economic effects in New York. It grants defendants’ motion to transfer the action to the Southern District of Florida under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), denies the Rule 12(b)(3) motion to dismiss, and declines to address dismissal for failure to state a claim.

Holdings

1. Defendants were not judicially estopped from contesting venue because plaintiffs did not show that defendants had taken an inconsistent position concerning venue in a materially similar factual and legal setting that had been adopted by another tribunal.
2. The forum-selection clause in the 2021 promotional agreement did not encompass plaintiffs' claims and therefore did not establish an enforceable requirement that this action be litigated in the Southern District of New York.
3. Venue was not proper in the Southern District of New York because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to plaintiffs' claims did not occur there.
4. Because venue was improper in the Southern District of New York, and the action could have been brought in the Southern District of Florida, transfer there was in the interest of justice under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).

Questions Presented

1. Whether defendants were judicially estopped from contesting venue based on positions taken in other litigation.
2. Whether a forum-selection clause in a 2021 promotional agreement required this action to be brought in the Southern District of New York.
3. Whether venue was proper in the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to plaintiffs' claims occurred there.
4. Whether the action should be transferred to the Southern District of Florida under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).

Disposition

remanded