![]() This section applies to contracts, agreements, and undertakings entered into before, on, or after its effective date it shall be fully retroactive. Shiley, Inc., (1991) 54 Cal.3d 744, 751.Ĭode of Civil Procedure section 410.40 states that “Any person may maintain an action or proceeding in a court of this state against a foreign corporation or nonresident person where the action or proceeding arises out of or relates to any contract, agreement, or undertaking for which a choice of California law has been made in whole or in part by the parties thereto and which (a) is a contract, agreement, or undertaking, contingent or otherwise, relating to a transaction involving in the aggregate not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000), and (b) contains a provision or provisions under which the foreign corporation or nonresident agrees to submit to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state. The moving party must also establish that a suitable alternative forum exists.Ĭourts in California have utilized a two prong approach in ruling on a forum non conveniens motion in California: (1) Defendants must establish that a suitable alternative forum exists, and (2) The Court must balance the private interests of the parties and the public interest in maintaining an action in California. The doctrine is typically applied to litigation where all of the parties are out-of-state residents and where the cause of action arose outside the forum state. In California the doctrine is typically applied where none of the parties is a California resident, and where the cause of action arose outside of the forum state. Not surprisingly the motion was denied.Īnd the United States Supreme Court has stated that the plaintiff’s choice of forum should only be disturbed if the balance weighs strongly in favor of the defendants. The entire motion should be reviewed along with all supporting attachments to determine if the moving party has met their burden.įor example several years ago I drafted an opposition to a forum non conveniens motion in California in which the moving defendants provided NO sworn declarations with the motion. The good news for any party opposing a forum non conveniens motion in California is that the moving defendant(s) have the burden of proof. Burden of proof on forum non conveniens motion in California. ![]() The motion is made on the grounds that the forum state, namely California, is an inconvenient forum in which to have the case heard. I want to stress that any documents opposing a forum non conveniens motion in California should be filed and served no later than nine (9) court days before the hearing and served by personal service or overnight delivery pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1005 unless the Court has ordered otherwise. Opposing a forum non conveniens motion in California is the topic of this blog post.Ī forum non conveniens motion in California is also known as a motion to dismiss on the grounds of inconvenient forum. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |