Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2023-00001777-CU-BT-CTL, Date: 2023-09-29 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - September 28, 2023

09/29/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-75 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:James A Mangione

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Business Tort Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00001777-CU-BT-CTL DONELSON VS AMAZON COM INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Defendant Amazon.Com Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, Stay the Action on Grounds of Forum Non Conveniens is granted.

The Court finds that Plaintiff consented to the Conditions of Use agreement dated May 3, 2021, which encompasses the claims at issue in the instant case. The Court now addresses the enforceability of the forum selection clause.

While California courts will generally enforce contractual forum selection clauses, they 'will refuse to defer to the selected forum if to do so would substantially diminish the rights of California residents in a way that violates our state's public policy.' (America Online, Inc. v. Superior Court (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 1, 11.) 'Where the effect of transfer to a different forum has the potential of stripping California consumers of their legal rights deemed by the Legislature to be non-waivable, the burden must be placed on the party asserting the contractual forum selection clause to prove that the CLRA's anti-waiver provisions are not violated.' (Id. at 11.) Therefore, it is Defendant's burden to establish that the Washington choice of law and forum selection clauses would not diminish Plaintiff's rights under California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

Here, Defendant has shown that enforcing the forum selection clause will not substantially diminish Plaintiff's rights under the CLRA. Washington's Consumer Protection statutes, codified at Wash. Rev.

Code Ann. § 19.86 et seq., provides substantially the same protections as the CLRA. (See Wiseley v. Amazon.com, Inc. (9th Cir. 2017) 709 Fed. Appx. 862, 863 ('Washington's and California's consumer protection laws and protections against unconscionable contracts appear to be substantially similar.'); Wash. Rev. Code Ann. §§ 19.86.090, 19.86.140 (providing injunctive relief, actual damages, attorney's fees, treble damages and civil penalties for violations of the consumer protection act).) The case is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 418.10(a) (2).

The minute order is the order of the Court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2942630  3