In an October 5, 2010, decision by Justice Fried in connection with plaintiff-consultant’s action for breach of contract against defendant-property owners under a consulting agreement to find a buyer for defendants’ property, and on defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint under CPLR 3211 [a] [4] and CPLR 327, the court denied defendants’ motion, finding that the plain language of the jurisdiction clause in the parties’ consulting agreement was sufficiently particular and mandatory – i.e. “chose a particular forum, New York, and selected it ‘unconditionally and irrevocably’” – to be deemed a mandatory forum-selection clause rather than a permissive service-of-suit clause. Because contractual provisions for the selection of a forum for litigation are prima facie valid in New York, the court enforced the provision in the parties’ agreement and denied defendants’ motion.