Court Upheld Employment Contract Forum Selection Clause
The ruling limits where executives can contest contract disputes by confirming the enforceability of forum selection terms.
Updated on Sept. 22, 2026 in Openings & Closings
Live Poll
Should companies be allowed to use non-solicitation contracts to restrict former employees?
A federal court has denied a motion to dismiss a breach of contract lawsuit brought against John Jacobi by Acrisure, LLC and SWDS Holdings, Inc. The ruling affirms the enforceability of forum selection clauses in executive employment agreements, allowing the case to proceed as filed.
Why it matters
This decision reinforces the legal weight of forum selection clauses, which dictate the specific jurisdiction where contract disputes must be litigated. For operators, it underscores the importance of reviewing venue provisions in executive contracts to understand potential litigation exposure.
The federal court ruling denied a motion to dismiss one breach of contract lawsuit, confirming the court's jurisdiction over the defendant. It remains unknown how the merits of the underlying breach claim will be decided at trial.
The players
Acrisure, LLC
A large insurance brokerage and fintech services provider with global operations.
SWDS Holdings, Inc.
An insurance holding company involved in the litigation as a plaintiff.
John Jacobi
A former executive facing breach of contract allegations regarding the solicitation of customer accounts.
Edgewood Partners Insurance Center
A national insurance brokerage firm cited as the destination for transferred business accounts.
The details
The court rejected the defendant's motion to transfer, finding that the forum selection clause within the employment contract was binding. By granting a preliminary injunction without an evidentiary hearing, the court effectively limited the defendant's ability to move customer accounts to Edgewood Partners Insurance Center during the litigation. The ruling relied on the first-to-file rule, allowing the plaintiffs to pursue the claim in the current venue.
Timeline
September 22, 2026: The court issued the ruling on the motion and injunction.
Market Landscape
This decision follows the established application of the first-to-file rule in federal litigation. It reaffirms how courts prioritize original filings when evaluating challenges to personal jurisdiction and venue.
Operators should consult with legal counsel to ensure that forum selection clauses in executive and key employee contracts are robust and correctly drafted. This ruling serves as a reminder that venue provisions are often dispositive in early-stage litigation maneuvers.
The takeaway
The court's decision underscores that employment contract clauses are frequently enforced as written during preliminary disputes. Owners should audit existing restrictive covenants and venue clauses to ensure they align with the company's preferred litigation strategy.
Further reading
For additional insights on contract disputes, see the Openings & Closings section.
Source note: This article includes information reported by Michigan Lawyers Weekly.
Live Poll
Should companies be allowed to use non-solicitation contracts to restrict former employees?
