overwhelming hardship standard in Delaware

2024Ct. Aug. 26, 2024). 26 properly should decide than those of another jurisdiction; (5) the pendency or nonpendency of a similar action or actions in another jurisdiction; and (6) all other practical problems that would make the trial of the case easy, expeditious and inexpensive.122 Dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds requires the movant show that “overwhelming hardship and inconvenience” would result if dismissal is not granted.123 “It is not enough that all of the Cryo-Maid factors may favor defendant.”124 Depriving the plaintiff of their chosen forum requires the movant to “meet the hi

2023Nov. 2, 2000); see Martinez, 86 A.3d at 1105 (discussing IM2 with approval and agreeing that “a more restrained meaning is at the essence of the overwhelming hardship standard” (cleaned up)). 16 When considering whether the Cryo-Maid factors weigh heavily and decisively in favor of dismissal, the court should not treat them as a checklist or tally sheet.

2026But even in cases where the alternative jurisdiction has a clear cut “greater interest in applying its substantive law . . . the choice-of-law factor [has not risen] to the overwhelming hardship standard.”117 Rather, “Delaware courts are well-equipped to apply California law, especially where there are no novel ‘Delaware's interest in the litigation,’ a focus evident in the phrasing of the factor itself.”) (quoting Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. v. Schrapper, 774 A.2d 264, 271 (Del. 2001)). 115 GXP I, 234 A.3d at 1198. 116 Id. 117 Royal Indem.

2026But even in cases where the alternative jurisdiction has a clear cut “greater interest in applying its substantive law . . . the choice-of-law factor [has not risen] to the overwhelming hardship standard.”117 Rather, “Delaware courts are well-equipped to apply California law, especially where there are no novel ‘Delaware's interest in the litigation,’ a focus evident in the phrasing of the factor itself.”) (quoting Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. v. Schrapper, 774 A.2d 264, 271 (Del. 2001)). 115 GXP I, 234 A.3d at 1198. 116 Id. 117 Royal Indem.

2015P’ship, 669 A.2d 104, 107 (Del. 1995))). ® See 86 A.3d 1102, 1106-11 (Del. 2014) (“[A]lthough the overwhelming hardship standard is stringent, it is not preclusive.

2015PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS Trubuilt argues that the Mozeiks’ Complaint should be dismissed on the grounds of forum non conveniens. 16 Because the Mozeiks and Trubuilt are both 11 Martinez, 86 A.3d at 1104 (quoting Chrysler, 669 A.2d at 105 ) (internal quotations omitted). 12 Id. (“[T]o prevail under the forum non conveniens doctrine, a defendant must meet the high burden of showing that the traditional forum non conveniens factors weigh so heavily that the defendant will face overwhelming hardship if the lawsuit proceeds in Delaware.”). 13 Chrysler, 669 A.2d at 105 . 14 See id. at 107 15 Martinez, 8

2024Ct. Aug. 26, 2024). 26 properly should decide than those of another jurisdiction; (5) the pendency or nonpendency of a similar action or actions in another jurisdiction; and (6) all other practical problems that would make the trial of the case easy, expeditious and inexpensive.122 Dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds requires the movant show that “overwhelming hardship and inconvenience” would result if dismissal is not granted.123 “It is not enough that all of the Cryo-Maid factors may favor defendant.”124 Depriving the plaintiff of their chosen forum requires the movant to “meet the hi

2015Foods Corp. v. Cryo-Maid, Inc., 198 A.2d 681, 684 (Del. 1964); Taylor v. LSI Logic Corp., 689 A.2d 1196, 1198-99 (Del. 1997)). -4- No plaintiff’s forum choice should be disturbed unless – in the “rare case”11 – the complaining defendant can demonstrate through the Cryo-Maid factors “overwhelming hardship.” 12 “It is not enough that all of the Cryo-Maid factors may favor the defendant.”13 The Court must balance the plaintiff’s forum choice against the impact of that choice on the defendant to consider whether an action should be dismissed for overwhelming hardship and inconvenience.14 A defenda

2018I do not think that cases where 43 213 A.2d 444, 447 (Del. 1965). 44 729 A.2d 832 (Del. 1999). 45 86 A.3d 1102, 1105 (Del. 2014). 20 the motion was denied for failure to show overwhelming hardship provide any helpful guidance on the question of a need for an alternative, available forum.

2016DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., 729 A.2d 832, 840 (Del. 1999). 41 CryO-Maid, Inc., 198 A.2d 61684 ; Wizliams Gas supply Co. v. Apache Corp., 594 A.2d 34, 37 (Del. 1991); Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. v. Schrapper, 774 A.2d 264, 269 (Del. 2001); Martinez v. E.I.

2023Foods Corp. v. Cryo-Maid, Inc., 198 A.2d 681 , 684 (Del. Ch. 1964)). -4- compulsory process for witnesses; (3) the possibility of the view of the premises, if appropriate; (4) all other practical problems that would make the trial of the case easy, expeditious and inexpensive; (5) whether or not the controversy is dependent upon the application of Delaware law which the courts of this State more properly should decide than those of another jurisdiction; and (6) the pendency or nonpendency of a similar action in another jurisdiction.24 When the Delaware action is the only-filed the Court applie

2015Foods Corp. v. Cryo-Maid, Inc., 198 A.2d 681, 684 (Del. 1964); Taylor v. LSI Logic Corp., 689 A.2d 1196, 1198-99 (Del. 1997)). -4- No plaintiff’s forum choice should be disturbed unless – in the “rare case”11 – the complaining defendant can demonstrate through the Cryo-Maid factors “overwhelming hardship.” 12 “It is not enough that all of the Cryo-Maid factors may favor the defendant.”13 The Court must balance the plaintiff’s forum choice against the impact of that choice on the defendant to consider whether an action should be dismissed for overwhelming hardship and inconvenience.14 A defenda

2021Id. at 446 .

2018I do not think that cases where 43 213 A.2d 444, 447 (Del. 1965). 44 729 A.2d 832 (Del. 1999). 45 86 A.3d 1102, 1105 (Del. 2014). 20 the motion was denied for failure to show overwhelming hardship provide any helpful guidance on the question of a need for an alternative, available forum.

2024Fund v. Allied Irish Banks, P.L.C., 173 A.3d 1033, 1036-37 (Del. 2017) (citing Gen.

2022Co., 2014 WL 703808 , at *2 (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 17, 2014) (“Delaware courts have held that the overwhelming hardship standard also applies where granting a stay of a contemporaneously filed action would likely have the same ultimate effect as a dismissal.” (citations omitted)); Rosen v. Wind River Sys., Inc., 2009 WL 1856460 , at *3 (Del. Ch. June 26, 2009); see also Brandin v. Deason, 941 A.2d 1020 , 1024 n.13 (Del. Ch. July 20, 2007) (“Some debate exists as to whether, if a motion seeks to stay litigation rather than dismiss it pursuant to forum non conveniens, a defendant still must show

2022Co., 2014 WL 703808 , at *2 (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 17, 2014) (“Delaware courts have held that the overwhelming hardship standard also applies where granting a stay of a contemporaneously filed action would likely have the same ultimate effect as a dismissal.” (citations omitted)); Rosen v. Wind River Sys., Inc., 2009 WL 1856460 , at *3 (Del. Ch. June 26, 2009); see also Brandin v. Deason, 941 A.2d 1020 , 1024 n.13 (Del. Ch. July 20, 2007) (“Some debate exists as to whether, if a motion seeks to stay litigation rather than dismiss it pursuant to forum non conveniens, a defendant still must show

2022Co., 2014 WL 703808 , at *2 (Del. Super. Ct. Feb. 17, 2014) (“Delaware courts have held that the overwhelming hardship standard also applies where granting a stay of a contemporaneously filed action would likely have the same ultimate effect as a dismissal.” (citations omitted)); Rosen v. Wind River Sys., Inc., 2009 WL 1856460 , at *3 (Del. Ch. June 26, 2009); see also Brandin v. Deason, 941 A.2d 1020 , 1024 n.13 (Del. Ch. July 20, 2007) (“Some debate exists as to whether, if a motion seeks to stay litigation rather than dismiss it pursuant to forum non conveniens, a defendant still must show

2019If the proposed jurisdictions would render 151 Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. v. Arteaga, 113 A.3d 1045, 1050 (Del. 2015). 152 See, e.g., Deuley v. DynCorp Int’l, Inc., 8 A.3d 1156, 1161 (Del. 2010); CertiSign Holding, Inc. v. Kulikovsky, 2018 WL 2938311 , at *22-23 (Del. Ch. June 7, 2018); In re Bay Hills Emerging Partners I, L.P., 2018 WL 3217650 , at *4-5 (Del. Ch. July 2, 2018), appeal refused sub nom.

2019If the proposed jurisdictions would render 151 Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. v. Arteaga, 113 A.3d 1045, 1050 (Del. 2015). 152 See, e.g., Deuley v. DynCorp Int’l, Inc., 8 A.3d 1156, 1161 (Del. 2010); CertiSign Holding, Inc. v. Kulikovsky, 2018 WL 2938311 , at *22-23 (Del. Ch. June 7, 2018); In re Bay Hills Emerging Partners I, L.P., 2018 WL 3217650 , at *4-5 (Del. Ch. July 2, 2018), appeal refused sub nom.

2016DuPont de Nemours & Co., 86 A.3d 1102, 1104 (Del. 2014) (citation omitted). 85 See, e.g., id. at 1105 n.11 (collecting cases where the Supreme Court reversed trial court determinations that the overwhelming-hardship standard was met). 86 See Lisa, S.A. v. Mayorga, 993 A.2d 1042, 1047 (Del. 2010). 87 Id. 88 Id. (quoting United Phosphorus, Ltd. v. Micro-Flo, 808 A.2d 761, 764 (Del. 2002)). 89 Id. (citations omitted) (emphasis supplied by Supreme Court). 20 attaches and provides a trial court broader discretion in analyzing a motion to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds.90 Thus, as a thresho

2016DuPont de Nemours & Co., 86 A.3d 1102, 1104 (Del. 2014) (citation omitted). 85 See, e.g., id. at 1105 n.11 (collecting cases where the Supreme Court reversed trial court determinations that the overwhelming-hardship standard was met). 86 See Lisa, S.A. v. Mayorga, 993 A.2d 1042, 1047 (Del. 2010). 87 Id. 88 Id. (quoting United Phosphorus, Ltd. v. Micro-Flo, 808 A.2d 761, 764 (Del. 2002)). 89 Id. (citations omitted) (emphasis supplied by Supreme Court). 20 attaches and provides a trial court broader discretion in analyzing a motion to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds.90 Thus, as a thresho

2016DuPont de Nemours & Co., 86 A.3d 1102, 1104 (Del. 2014) (citation omitted). 85 See, e.g., id. at 1105 n.11 (collecting cases where the Supreme Court reversed trial court determinations that the overwhelming-hardship standard was met). 86 See Lisa, S.A. v. Mayorga, 993 A.2d 1042, 1047 (Del. 2010). 87 Id. 88 Id. (quoting United Phosphorus, Ltd. v. Micro-Flo, 808 A.2d 761, 764 (Del. 2002)). 89 Id. (citations omitted) (emphasis supplied by Supreme Court). 20 attaches and provides a trial court broader discretion in analyzing a motion to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds.90 Thus, as a thresho

2016DuPont de Nemours & Co., 86 A.3d 1102, 1104 (Del. 2014) (citation omitted). 85 See, e.g., id. at 1105 n.11 (collecting cases where the Supreme Court reversed trial court determinations that the overwhelming-hardship standard was met). 86 See Lisa, S.A. v. Mayorga, 993 A.2d 1042, 1047 (Del. 2010). 87 Id. 88 Id. (quoting United Phosphorus, Ltd. v. Micro-Flo, 808 A.2d 761, 764 (Del. 2002)). 89 Id. (citations omitted) (emphasis supplied by Supreme Court). 20 attaches and provides a trial court broader discretion in analyzing a motion to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds.90 Thus, as a thresho

2016DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., 729 A.2d 832, 840 (Del. 1999). 41 CryO-Maid, Inc., 198 A.2d 61684 ; Wizliams Gas supply Co. v. Apache Corp., 594 A.2d 34, 37 (Del. 1991); Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. v. Schrapper, 774 A.2d 264, 269 (Del. 2001); Martinez v. E.I.