Matco Tools Corporation, et al. v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, et al.

Courts adjudicating forum non conveniens motions seeking to enforce forum-selection clauses as a general rule do not consider whether the underlying contract is valid. Instead, they determine only whether the forum-selection clause itself is valid and enforceable. Here, however, the Ninth Circuit held this rule does not apply when the forum-selection clause is contained in an allegedly invalid arbitration agreement. The question presented here is: May a district court create an exception to the rule that the validity of a forum-selection clause does not depend upon the validity of the underlying contract containing the clause, based upon the subject matter of the contract? (i)