Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute
United States Supreme Court
499 U.S. 585 (1991)
- Written by Christine Hilgeman, JD
Facts
Eulala and Russel Shute (plaintiffs) purchased tickets through a travel agent in Washington state for a cruise operated by Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. (Carnival) (defendant). Only after purchasing their tickets from the travel agent did the Shutes receive paper tickets containing a form contract with a forum-selection clause requiring all disputes to be brought in Florida. The form contract was comparable to form ticket contracts used by other cruise lines. The face of the ticket warned that passage was subject to acceptance of the terms of the ticket contract, and the Shutes admitted to having been made aware of the forum-selection clause. The ticket contract also contained a provision that no refunds were available for the tickets once purchased. While on the cruise in international waters, Eulala Shute fell during a tour of the ship, and the Shutes sued Carnival for damages in Washington district court. Carnival moved to dismiss, citing the forum-selection clause, and asserted a lack of personal jurisdiction in Washington. The district court granted the motion, finding insufficient contacts for personal jurisdiction in Washington. The court of appeals reversed, finding sufficient contacts with the State of Washington, and refused to enforce the forum-selection clause. Carnival appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
Dissent (Stevens, J)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
