Hathaway v. Keystone R V Co
6:23-cv-00951
W.D. La.May 22, 2024Background
- Plaintiffs purchased a new 2022 Keystone RV in Texas and allege manufacturing defects became apparent within months, with repairs attempted in Louisiana.
- Plaintiffs filed suit under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and Louisiana redhibition laws in the Western District of Louisiana.
- Keystone responded actively in the Louisiana litigation: waiving service, filing an answer, participating in the discovery process, and agreeing to trial dates.
- Over eight months after the initial complaint and amid ongoing proceedings, Keystone moved to change venue, citing a forum selection clause in its warranty requiring litigation in Indiana.
- Plaintiffs opposed the motion, claiming late filing constituted waiver and the forum selection clause was neither provided to nor signed by them.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of Motion for Change of Venue | Hathaway: Motion is untimely and dilatory, causing unfair prejudice. | Keystone: No extraordinary circumstances to disregard forum selection clause. | Court held motion was untimely; active participation indicated waiver. |
| Waiver of Forum Selection Clause | Hathaway: Keystone's actions waive the right to enforce clause. | Keystone: No waiver; clause should be enforced per precedent. | Court found waiver under both approaches – by conduct and prejudice. |
| Enforceability of Forum Selection Clause | Hathaway: Clause is invalid as plaintiffs never received or agreed to it. | Keystone: Written warranty containing clause was given and controls. | Court found conduct inconsistent with enforcement; clause waived. |
| Prejudice to Plaintiffs if Venue Changed | Hathaway: Would be prejudiced due to discovery conducted and loss of remedy in Indiana. | Keystone: No significant prejudice shown beyond standard inconvenience. | Court found prejudice would result; venue change denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Atl. Marine Const. Co. v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for W. Dist. of Texas, 571 U.S. 49 (2013) (forum selection clauses are presumptively valid except in extraordinary circumstances)
- Hampton v. Equity Tr. Co., [citation="736 F. App'x 430"] (5th Cir. 2018) (setting forth standards for waiver of a forum selection clause)
- Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n., 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (filing objections to magistrate recommendations per federal rules)