Case Name: Tom L. MARLOWE, Appellant, v. REDI-NATIONAL PEST ELIMINATORS, INC., Respondent
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Oregon
Decision Date: 1991-03-20
Citations: 106 Or. App. 419
Docket Number: 89C 11083; CA A63716
Parties: Tom L. MARLOWE, Appellant, v. REDI-NATIONAL PEST ELIMINATORS, INC., Respondent.
Judges: Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Rossman and De Muniz, Judges.
Reporter: Oregon Reports, Court of Appeals
Volume: 106
Pages: 419–420

Head Matter:
Argued and submitted October 26, 1990,
reversed and remanded March 20, 1991
Tom L. MARLOWE, Appellant, v. REDI-NATIONAL PEST ELIMINATORS, INC., Respondent.
(89C 11083; CA A63716)
806 P2d 1181
Dale L. Crandall, Salem, argued the cause and filed the briefs for appellant.
John F. Adlard, Salem, argued the cause and filed the brief for respondent.
Before Buttler, Presiding Judge, and Rossman and De Muniz, Judges.
PER CURIAM

Opinion:
PER CURIAM
Plaintiff brought this action to rescind a franchise agreement. The court granted defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, on the basis of this provision in the contract:
"Any action brought to enforce any right under this Agreement shall be brought in the Federal District or Superior Court in King County, Washington."
Assuming that that provision applies to this case, and no party challenges that, it would not preclude the Oregon court from acquiring personal jurisdiction over defendant, which was properly served with the summons and complaint. Defendant conceded at oral argument that the court had personal jurisdiction over it. The court erred in granting defendant's motion to dismiss on that ground.
Reversed and remanded.
Plaintiff is not seeking "to enforce any right under [the] agreement"; he seeks to rescind it.