Appellant court summary[]
I was thinking of changing the last sentence of the second paragraph of this section to include more details and information about the second criterion of the forum selection clause, as follows:
Original (for reference): Appellant could point to no fraud or overreaching, nor claim that the forum was inconvenient (the court noted that Forrest “need only cross the Potomac River”), and likewise, public policy dictates a strong need to uphold forum selection clauses wherever possible.
Proposed: Appellant could point to no fraud or overreaching, and public policy dictates a strong need to uphold forum selection clauses wherever possible. Regarding the second criterion, the court noted that remedies were still available outside of a class action, such as through the small claims court, and that the attorney fees were not unreasonably inconvenient (the court noted that Forrest “need only cross the Potomac River”).
I'm not 100% certain if this is unnecessary detail, or if I adjusted the meaning in any way or misused any terms, but I think adding this to the summary would better explain why the Appeals Court found in favour of the original ruling. -Techhead7890 08:24, 12 August 2022 (UTC)