Court Denies Employer's Motion For Summary Judgment That Seaman Is Bound By A Forum Selection Clause In Her POEA Contract Where The Seaman Signed A One Page Document Referring To Two Other Documents That The Seaman Testifies She Did Not Receive.
Jocelyn D. Angeles, Plaintiff, -against- Norwegian Cruise Lines, Inc., Defendant.
No. 01 CV 9441(RCC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16134
August 28, 2002, Decided
August 29, 2002, Filed
DISPOSITION: Defendant's motion for summary judgment denied without prejudice.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff former employee brought a maritime action against defendant former employer, a cruise line, alleging sexual harassment and gender discrimination. The employer filed a motion for summary judgment contending that the employment arrangement between the parties was subject to a forum selection clause.
OVERVIEW: The employee claimed that she was sexually harassed and discriminated against primarily because of conduct of her supervisor. The employer filed a motion for summary judgment, contending that the employment agreement signed by the employee and the employer contained a forum selection clause that gave the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA) or the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) exclusive jurisdiction over the action. The employee had signed a one-page document, which referred to two other standard documents. The forum selection clause was contained in the two standard documents, but the employee claimed in her affidavit that she had never received copies of the two standard documents. The court denied the employer's motion for summary judgment without prejudice. The court found that the employer had not provided any evidence to rebut the employee's assertion that she had not been given notice of the forum selection clause. The court indicated that it would reconsider the employer's motion at a later time, if appropriate after discovery.
OUTCOME: The court denied the employer's motion for summary judgment without prejudice. The court indicated that it would re-hear the employer's motion, if appropriate, after the employer and the employee had conducted discovery.
