how can a forum-selection clause be used to limit a client's exposure to suit?

Answer 1

Either by selecting a state and set of laws that favor the client's position, or by requiring arbitration, thus reducing litigation costs.

Some states are more favorable for certain types of suits than others, either because of tort liability limitations, long-established precedent favoring their expected position or other statutes that might benefit them. By having both a choice of law and choice of forum clause in a contract (and they are not the same), the client can rely on those laws in their favor should a dispute arise.

The other option is a mandatory arbitration clause. One of the biggest exposures during litigation are discovery costs. By limiting discovery in an arbitration clause, the client can drastically reduce their potential litigation expenses. Also, because there is less possibility of having protracted procedural warfare once arbitration has begun, the overall litigation costs can be reduced as well.

It all depends on the situation and what the client is trying to accomplish.

Answer 2

Agreed with the above: from firsthand experience, discovery is absurdly expensive and outrageously contentious.

As a pro se plaintiff in a Circuit Court tort, I won judgment approximately 6.4 times the contract damages in a suit contesting breach of contract, bad faith, tortious breach of contract and slander.

IMHO, the court allowed the defendant (a foreign corporation) and its attorneys (a seasoned, multi-partner firm established in 1932 and having its offices directly across the street from the courthouse) to flout the Rules of Civil Procedure and the Rules of Professional Conduct, perhaps in an effort to make it plain upon appeal that the defendant had been afforded extraordinary latitude in presenting its case.

However, since I was not privy to the calculus of the court, it certainly seemed the momentum was very much against me. Emotionally, it was an exceedingly difficult undertaking.

As a veteran, I can say with confidence that war is not nearly the test of one's mettle that is a suit at law.