Opinion ID: 2733581
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Kerzner’s First Motion to Dismiss

Text: Kerzner moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that a forum-selection clause in the contract between the Pappases and Kerzner required that the case be litigated exclusively in the Bahamas. The exhibits attached to the motion to dismiss showed that, on February 4, 2011, the Pappases made an online reservation at the Atlantis Resort to check-in on Saturday, March 5, 2011 and check-out on Wednesday, March 9. When the Pappases made their reservation, one of them clicked a box indicating that he or she had reviewed and agreed to Kerzner’s terms and conditions. One of those terms and conditions provided that when the Pappases registered at the hotel, they would be asked to sign a form agreeing that all claims from their resort stay shall be governed by Bahamian law with the Bahamas Supreme Court as the exclusive venue: ATLANTIS REGISTRATION: During guest registration at Atlantis, Paradise Island you will be asked to sign a form agreeing to the following terms related to any claims you may have as a result of your stay at the resort: ‘I agree that any claim I may have against [Kerzner] . . . resulting from any events occurring in The Bahamas shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of . . . The Bahamas, and further, irrevocably agree to the Supreme Court of The Bahamas as the exclusive venue for any such proceedings whatsoever. 3 Case: 14-11098 Date Filed: 09/17/2014 Page: 4 of 13 Additionally, Kerzner sent the Pappases a confirmation email immediately after the Pappases made their reservation. That email included a link to these same terms and conditions. Thus, Kerzner twice informed the Pappases that, when they arrived at the resort, they would be asked to agree that all disputes be litigated exclusively in the Bahamas under Bahamian law. Unsurprisingly, during check-in, the Pappases received a form entitled, “Acknowledgement, Agreement and Release,” which contained the forumselection clause. That form stated: “I irrevocably agree to the Supreme Court of The Bahamas as the exclusive venue for . . . proceedings” on claims against Kerzner arising out of the Pappases’ stay in the Bahamas. Both Elaine and Nicholas Pappas signed this form The Pappases responded to the motion to dismiss by arguing that the forumselection clause was unenforceable because they did not receive “adequate notice” of the clause before they signed it at check-in. The district court granted the motion to dismiss, characterizing it as a motion to dismiss for improper venue pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Under this Court’s precedent at the time, Rule 12(b)(3) was the proper vehicle for enforcing a valid forum-selection clause. See Bailey v. ERG Enters., LP, 705 F.3d 1311, 1314 n.1 (11th Cir. 2013) (noting that “we treat a 4 Case: 14-11098 Date Filed: 09/17/2014 Page: 5 of 13 dismissal based on a forum-selection clause as a question of proper venue under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3)”). The district court found that Kerzner “reasonably communicated the forum selection clause to [the Pappases]” before the Pappases arrived at the resort, and therefore, the clause was enforceable. Accordingly, the district court dismissed the complaint with prejudice pursuant to Rule 12(b)(3).