Schutzman v. ANT Productions, LLC
- Jed Rakoff
- 1:25-cv-03609
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Schutzman v. ANT Productions, LLC, Judge Reeves transferred the case to New York and denied dismissal without prejudice.
The case brought by Stephen J. Schutzman was transferred from the Eastern District of Kentucky to the Southern District of New York. Berkley National Insurance Company and Ant Productions, LLC obtained the requested transfer, while their dismissal requests were denied without prejudice. Future filings must be made in the Southern District of New York.
What happened
Stephen J. Schutzman, as trustee of the NK Hart Trust Agreement, sued Ant Productions, LLC, and others. The defendants asked the court either to dismiss the case or transfer it because the parties’ agreement required disputes to be brought in New York courts. Schutzman argued that Kentucky was the proper location because the allegedly damaged property was there.
The court enforced the agreement’s forum-selection clause. It found that Schutzman did not show fraud, unfairness, or extraordinary circumstances making transfer unjust. The court also said that inconvenience to the parties was not enough to invalidate the clause.
Judge Danny C. Reeves granted the defendants’ motions to the extent they sought transfer of venue and denied them, without prejudice, to the extent they sought dismissal. The clerk was ordered to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, where future filings must be made.
The detailed version
- Schutzman v. ANT Productions, LLC · No. 1:25-cv-03609
- Jed Rakoff
- Apr. 30, 2025
Background
Stephen J. Schutzman, as trustee of the NK Hart Trust Agreement, brought this action against Ant Productions, LLC, Berkley National Insurance Company, and other defendants. Berkley and Ant each filed a motion under Rule 12(b)(6), which concerns whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim, or alternatively asked the court to transfer the case under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
The agreement at issue states that New York law governs agreements made and performed in New York and that disputes concerning the agreement must be brought only in New York state or federal courts. Schutzman argued that Kentucky was the proper venue because the allegedly damaged property was located there. He also argued that the clause did not require applying New York law and that litigating in New York would be unreasonable and inconvenient.
Court’s analysis
The court explained that forum-selection clauses are presumed valid and enforceable unless the party opposing enforcement shows that enforcement would be unreasonable. The court considered whether the clause resulted from fraud, duress, or other unconscionable conduct; whether the chosen forum would handle the case ineffectively or unfairly; and whether the forum would be so seriously inconvenient that requiring suit there would be unjust.
The court stated that Schutzman did not allege that the clause was obtained through fraud, duress, or unconscionable means. He also did not argue that New York courts would handle the dispute ineffectively or unfairly. The court concluded that his assertion that litigating in New York would be inconvenient was not a proper basis for challenging the clause’s validity.
The court also rejected Schutzman’s reliance on public-interest factors associated with transferring a case. Under the court’s analysis, those factors did not overcome the clause’s presumption of validity because no extraordinary circumstances clearly disfavored transfer.
Disposition
The court granted Berkley National Insurance Company’s and Ant Productions, LLC’s motions to the extent they requested a venue transfer. It denied the motions, without prejudice, to the extent they requested dismissal. The clerk was directed to transfer the matter to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1404, and all further filings were directed to that court.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.