Let’s say that you’re the deal lawyer representing a California company in contract negotiations with a New York company. Your client insists on designating California law as the operative body of law that governs the agreement and any related disputes, and on mandating that all disputes be resolved in a California state or federal court.
You negotiate hard for your client’s objective, but the other side is equally determined to designate New York law and New York courts. Your client lacks bargaining leverage to force the issue. Eventually, the other side carries the day on this battle, and your client is forced to accept the designation of New York law and courts in the contract.
Is there a way to accept such an outcome and nevertheless prevail on this issue, such that your client can in fact initiate litigation in California under California law notwithstanding?
Yes, there is. Found out how in Redline.
