J.G. v. Rustic Pathways, LLC

Background

J.G. brought the action individually and on behalf of her daughter, identified as Jane Doe. The opinion states that J.G. and Jane Doe are Pennsylvania residents, and that Jane Doe was a minor when the alleged events occurred and when the action was filed. Jane Doe participated in Rustic Pathways, LLC’s overseas “Marine Life and Coastal Restoration” program in July 2021. J.G. alleged that an older male participant repeatedly groped and assaulted Jane Doe, that other students bullied and threatened her, and that Rustic’s management and staff did not take reasonable measures to protect her after she reported her experiences. J.G. also alleged that Rustic did not notify parents about the conduct and ignored multiple requests for information.

J.G. sued Rustic and its parent company, Sabot Family Companies. The three individual defendants named in the First Amended Complaint were later voluntarily dismissed. Before the program, J.G. and Jane Doe signed Rustic’s onboarding documents. The Participation Agreement stated that legal proceedings relating to or arising from the program or agreement had to be filed only in the state court located in Lake County, Ohio.

The parties’ arguments

The defendants moved to dismiss under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, a procedure allowing a court to dismiss when a different forum is the proper place to hear the dispute. They also sought dismissal for failure to state a claim or, alternatively, transfer to the Northern District of Ohio. The defendants argued that the forum-selection clause covered the claims, was valid, and should be enforced.

J.G. argued that the clause was invalid because it appeared in a contract of adhesion and resulted from the defendants’ superior bargaining power. She also argued that the clause should not apply to Sabot because she did not know about that company when she signed the agreement. J.G. further argued that public-interest considerations favored keeping the case in the Northern District of California, including the presence of witnesses and Sabot’s connection to California.

Court’s analysis

The court held that the forum-selection clause covered all claims in the First Amended Complaint. Although Sabot had not signed the Participation Agreement, the court concluded that the claims against Sabot were closely based on J.G.’s contractual relationship with Rustic. The agreement also defined “Rustic Pathways” to include affiliated, related, and associated entities.

The court found the clause valid. Under federal law, forum-selection clauses are generally presumed valid, and the party challenging one bears a heavy burden to clearly show fraud, overreaching, or another basis for invalidity. The court concluded that J.G. had not met that burden. It found no legal support for the argument that the clause was invalid because the signatories did not know every possible future factual scenario or claim, and it found no factual support for the assertion that Rustic intentionally concealed information to induce J.G. to sign.

The court also found no extraordinary public-interest circumstances that justified refusing to enforce the clause. It reasoned that only Sabot, among the remaining parties, was domiciled in California; that Ohio had a greater local interest because of Rustic’s apparent greater participation in the underlying events; and that the presence of four likely witnesses in California did not make enforcement unjust or unreasonable. The court also noted that J.G. and Jane Doe were Pennsylvania residents.

Ruling

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint on forum non conveniens grounds. It did not reach the defendants’ arguments for transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) or dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), because the case was dismissed on forum grounds. The court denied the defendants’ remaining requests as moot.

The case was dismissed without leave to amend in the Northern District of California, but without prejudice to J.G.’s ability to refile in a proper forum.