 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Burstein v. Paradigm Geophysical3/8/2000
Michael Burstein sued Paradigm Geophysical, Ltd. and Paradigm Geophysical Corp. for wrongful termination of Burstein's employment. Based on a forum selection clause contained in an employment contract between Burstein and Paradigm Geophysical, Ltd. providing that all disputes relating to his employment be litigated in Israel, the trial court dismissed the suit without prejudice. In four points of error, Burstein generally complains the trial court erred in enforcing the forum selection clause and dismissing the suit. Because we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in enforcing the forum selection clause, we affirm the trial court's order of dismissal.
Burstein filed suit in Dallas County against appellees claiming wrongful termination of his employment contract with Paradigm Geophysical, Ltd. (Ltd.). In his Original Petition, Burstein claims he was retained by Ltd., an Israeli corporation, as its Chief Financial Officer pursuant to a written employment agreement which became effective February 22, 1996. The February 22, 1996 employment agreement is attached to the petition as Exhibit A. Burstein further alleges Ltd. operated a subsidiary, Paradigm Geophysical Corp. (Corp.), located in Houston, Texas, as an alter ego of Ltd., and that in December 1997 he was transferred to Corp., and Corp. continued to pay his salary until he was terminated in mid-1998. Burstein claims he was wrongfully terminated after refusing to falsify documents that were to be used for a pending registration statement. Burstein seeks actual damages for breach of his February 22, 1996 employment agreement with Ltd., including specifically the failure to pay salary and benefits provided by that contract. He further seeks exemplary damages in an "amount sufficient to catch the attention of a foreign corporation." In the Original Petition, Burstein does not allege the existence of any contract, oral or written, affecting his employment other than the February 22, 1996 employment agreement, nor does he allege this employment agreement was ever modified or amended.
Ltd. and Corp. filed a Motion to Dismiss seeking dismissal of the lawsuit, without prejudice, based on a forum selection clause contained in the February 22, 1996 employment agreement. Paragraph 7.8 of the agreement provides as follows:
Both parties hereby agree that the laws of the State of Israel shall apply to this Agreement and that the sole and exclusive place of jurisdiction in any matter relating out of or connected with this Agreement shall be the court of competent jurisdiction in the district of Tel Aviv, Israel.
In response to the Motion to Dismiss, Burstein filed a seven-page affidavit alleging the existence of various additional agreements which, according to Burstein, had the effect of vitiating the forum selection clause. According to the affidavit, Burstein originally entered into an oral employment agreement with Corp. in February 1996, and his compensation was paid by Corp.'s agent, Administaff Companies, Inc., a personnel service company, with Ltd. acting as a guarantor. After approximately five months, Burstein was transferred to Israel. Burstein alleges that after he moved to Israel, his oral employment agreement was reduced to writing in the form attached to his Original Petition, and back-dated to February 22, 1996, the date of his original employment with Corp. Additionally, Burstein contends Ltd. insisted the written contract must contain a forum selection clause providing for an Israeli forum and represented the clause was necessary in order to comply with Israeli law. He contends, however, that when Ltd. demanded he sign the February 22 agreement, Ltd. agreed to revise the forum selection cl
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Texas Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|