In the case of Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute et vir, 1990, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of Carnival Cruise Lines regarding a forum-selection clause on their tickets. The plaintiffs, Eulala and Russel Shute had purchased tickets for a cruise from California to Mexico but were injured during an accident while onboard in international waters off the coast of Mexico. They filed suit against Carnival Cruise lines in Washington State where they resided; however, according to the fine print on their ticket contract - which they admitted not reading - any litigation was required to be pursued only in Florida courts (where Carnival is headquartered). The court held that such clauses are enforceable as long as they are fundamentally fair and do not contravene public policy because it serves legitimate business interests by limiting potential forums for dispute resolution.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Shute et vir argued that the forum-selection clause on the ticket contract was not freely negotiated and therefore should not be enforceable. The dissenters believed that Mrs. Shute did not have meaningful choice regarding the terms of her cruise ticket, as they were presented to her on a take-it-or-leave-it basis by a corporation with far greater bargaining power than she had as an individual consumer. They also pointed out that enforcing such clauses could lead to unfair or inconvenient results for consumers who might need to travel great distances at significant expense in order to pursue their claims against corporations like Carnival Cruise Lines.