Fu Da International Ltd. v. Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.
||Fu Da International Ltd.
||Kohl's Department Stores, Inc.
||June 5, 2008
||US District Court for the Southern District of New York
||Foley Square Office
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
||28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|January 21, 2009
OPINION AND ORDER #96979: On January 12, 2009, while Kohls motion was sub judice, Kohls submitted to this Court a copy of the decision of the Hon. Richard B. Lowe, III, a Justice of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, in t he matter of Bijou International Corp. v. Kohls Department Stores, Inc., Index No. 601765/2008 (filed Dec. 24, 2008). In Bijou, the court dismissed the plaintiffs complaint due to the forum selection clauses in Kohls Terms and Conditions, which, as h ere, were incorporated by reference in the parties vendor support agreement, and in the EDI Agreement. However, in that decision Justice Lowe does not address the question of whether the Terms and Conditions, or the forum selection clause therein, ap peared on Kohl's' website at the time of the execution of the vendor support agreement; rather, he found that the EDI Agreement was applicable to his case, here it is not. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, this Court reaches a different conclusion from that reached in Bijou. Therefore, for the foregoing reasons, Kohl's' motion to dismiss is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Harold Baer on 1/21/2009) (jmi) Modified on 1/22/2009 (mro).
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?