forum non conveniens doctrine in Alabama

2008Discussion Alabama Code 1975, § 6-3-21.1(a), provides when a civil action must be transferred under the doctrine of forum non conveniens: “With respect to civil actions filed in an appropriate venue, any court of general jurisdiction shall, for the convenience of parties and witnesses, or in the interest of justice, transfer any civil action or any claim in any civil action to any court of general jurisdiction in which the action might have been properly filed and the case shall proceed as though originally filed therein.... ” (Emphasis added.) A party moving for a transfer under § 6-3-21.1 ha

2008Discussion Alabama Code 1975, § 6-3-21.1(a), provides when a civil action must be transferred under the doctrine of forum non conveniens: "With respect to civil actions filed in an appropriate venue, any court of general jurisdiction shall, for the convenience of parties and witnesses, or in the interest of justice, transfer any civil action or any claim in any civil action to any court of general jurisdiction in which the action might have been properly filed and the case shall proceed as though originally filed therein...." (Emphasis added.) A party moving for a transfer under § 6-3-21.1 has

2017Although we review a ruling on a motion to transfer to determine whether the trial court exceeded its discretion in granting or denying the motion, id. , where "the convenience of the parties and witnesses or the interest of justice would be best served by a transfer, § 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, compels the trial court to transfer the action to the alternative forum." Ex parte First Tennessee Bank Nat'l Ass'n , 994 So.2d 906 , 912 (Ala. 2008) (emphasis added).' " Ex parte Wachovia Bank, N.A. , 77 So.3d 570 , 573 (Ala. 2011). " ' "The purpose of the doctrine of forum non conveniens is to 'preve

2016Although we review a ruling on 'a motion to transfer to determine whether the trial court exceeded its discretion in granting or denying the motion, id. where ‘the convenience, of the parties and witnesses or the interest of justice would be best served by a transfer, § 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, compels the trial court to transfer the action to the alternative forum.’ Ex parte First Tennessee Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 994 So.2d 906, 912 (Ala.2008) (emphasis added).” Ex parte Wachovia Bank, N.A., 77 So.3d 570, 573 (Ala.2011). “ ‘The purpose of the doctrine of forum non conveniens is to “prevent the was

2003Co., 548 So.2d 1029, 1032 (Ala.1989), quoting the United States Supreme Court’s first authoritative statement on the doctrine of forum non conveniens in Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508 , 67 S.Ct. 839, 843 , 91 L.Ed. 1055 (1947), noted that ‘unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant, the plaintiffs choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.’ This Court also emphasized in Ex parte Auto-Owners that ‘[t]he prevailing question of whether a case should be entertained or dismissed depends largely upon the facts of the particular case and is in the sound discretion of the

2003Co., 548 So.2d 1029, 1032 (Ala.1989), quoting the United States Supreme Court’s first authoritative statement on the doctrine of forum non conveniens in Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508 , 67 S.Ct. 839, 843 , 91 L.Ed. 1055 (1947), noted that ‘unless the balance is strongly in favor of the defendant, the plaintiffs choice of forum should rarely be disturbed.’ This Court also emphasized in Ex parte Auto-Owners that ‘[t]he prevailing question of whether a case should be entertained or dismissed depends largely upon the facts of the particular case and is in the sound discretion of the

2018Section 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, "provides when a civil action must be transferred under the doctrine of forum non-conveniens ." Ex parte Indiana Mills & Mfg., Inc. , 10 So.3d 536 , 539 (Ala. 2008).

2018Section 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, "provides when a civil action must be transferred under the doctrine of forum non-conveniens ." Ex parte Indiana Mills & Mfg., Inc. , 10 So.3d 536 , 539 (Ala. 2008).

2014See Ex parte Townsend, 589 So.2d 711, 714 (Ala.1991) (“[The] doctrine [of fo *1037 rum non conveniens ] has a field of operation only where the action is commenced in a county in which venue is appropriate.”).

2014By doing so, we pretermit any discussion of the defendants’ request to transfer the case based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens, see § 6-3-21.1, Ala.Code 1975, because the doctrine of forum non conveniens “has a field of operation only where the action is commenced in a county in which venue is appropriate.”' Ex parte Townsend, 589 So.2d 711, 714 (Ala.1991).

2006Co., 663 So.2d 932, 936 (Ala.1995). “ ‘In 1987, the Legislature enacted § 6-3-21.1(a), Ala.Code 1975, and adopted the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

2006Co., 663 So.2d 932, 936 (Ala.1995). “ ‘In 1987, the Legislature enacted § 6-3-21.1(a), Ala.Code 1975, and adopted the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

2014Co., 663 So.2d 952, 956 (Ala.1995)) (stating that “the doctrine of forum non conveniens, as codified at § 6-3-21.1, ‘has a field of operation only where an action is commenced in a county in which venue is appropriate’ ”).

2010Co., 663 So.2d 952, 956 (Ala.1995) ("The doctrine of forum non conveniens ... codified at § 6-3-21.1 ... has a field of operation only where an action is commenced in a county in which venue is appropriate.”).

2017Although we review a ruling on a motion to transfer to determine whether the trial court exceeded its discretion in granting or denying the motion, id. , where "the convenience of the parties and witnesses or the interest of justice would be best served by a transfer, § 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, compels the trial court to transfer the action to the alternative forum." Ex parte First Tennessee Bank Nat'l Ass'n , 994 So.2d 906 , 912 (Ala. 2008) (emphasis added).' " Ex parte Wachovia Bank, N.A. , 77 So.3d 570 , 573 (Ala. 2011). " ' "The purpose of the doctrine of forum non conveniens is to 'preve

2016Although we review a ruling on 'a motion to transfer to determine whether the trial court exceeded its discretion in granting or denying the motion, id. where ‘the convenience, of the parties and witnesses or the interest of justice would be best served by a transfer, § 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, compels the trial court to transfer the action to the alternative forum.’ Ex parte First Tennessee Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 994 So.2d 906, 912 (Ala.2008) (emphasis added).” Ex parte Wachovia Bank, N.A., 77 So.3d 570, 573 (Ala.2011). “ ‘The purpose of the doctrine of forum non conveniens is to “prevent the was

2013See, e.g., Ex parte United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, 688 So.2d 246 (Ala. 1997); Ex paHe Preston Hood Chevrolet, Inc., 638 So.2d 842 (Ala.1994); Ex parte Employers Ins. of Wausau, 590 So.2d 888 (Ala.1991); Ex paHe Allied-Signal, Inc., 561 So.2d 1062 (Ala.1990); Ex paHe Auto-Owners Ins.

1998“Whether to dismiss an action based on the doctrine of forum non conve-niens is within the sound discretion of the trial court, and its ruling on that issue will not be disturbed absent an abuse of that discretion.” Ex parte United Bhd. of Carpenters, 688 So.2d 246, 249 (Ala.1997).

2009Cf. Ex parte Miller, Hamilton, Snider & Odom, LLC, 978 So.2d 12, 15-16 (Ala.2007) (Murdock, J., dissenting) (“[W]hen a case is pending in a court that has no authority over it because venue is improper, before any discretionary orders regarding the management or prosecution of the case are entered — including any order choosing which of two proper venues should be selected for the trial of the case — the case must first be transferred to a court with the authority to exercise such discretion and to make such decisions .... ”).

2009Cf. Ex parte Miller, Hamilton, Snider & Odom, LLC, 978 So.2d 12, 15-16 (Ala.2007) (Murdock, J., dissenting) ("[W]hen a case is pending in a court that has no authority over it because venue is improper, before any discretionary orders regarding the management or prosecution of the case are entered — including any order choosing which of two proper venues should be selected for the trial of the case — the case must first be transferred to a court with the authority to exercise such discretion and to make such decisions....").

2006C.W., 239 Neb. at 827-28 , 479 N.W.2d at 113-14 (one element in considering whether to transfer a case to an Indian tribal court is the doctrine of forum non conveniens).

2006C.W., 239 Neb. at 827-28 , 479 N.W.2d at 113-14 (one element in considering whether to transfer a case to an Indian tribal court is the doctrine of forum non conveniens).

2018Ex parte Integon Corp. , 672 So.2d 497 , 499 (Ala. 1995). 'A petition for the writ of mandamus is a proper method for presenting a venue challenge based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.' Id. (citations omitted).

2018Ex parte Integon Corp. , 672 So.2d 497 , 499 (Ala. 1995). 'A petition for the writ of mandamus is a proper method for presenting a venue challenge based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.' Id. (citations omitted).

2018SVC , 122 So.3d at 842 -43 (quoting Ex parte Nichols , 757 So.2d 374 , 379 (Ala. 1999), quoting in turn Van Dusen v. Barrack , 376 U.S. 612 , 645-46, 84 S.Ct. 805 , 11 L.Ed.2d 945 (1964) ).

2018SVC , 122 So.3d at 842 -43 (quoting Ex parte Nichols , 757 So.2d 374 , 379 (Ala. 1999), quoting in turn Van Dusen v. Barrack , 376 U.S. 612 , 645-46, 84 S.Ct. 805 , 11 L.Ed.2d 945 (1964) ).

1998In another case, the United States Supreme Court, applying the forum non conveniens doctrine, said a transfer under that doctrine is proper when: "`an alternative forum has jurisdiction to hear the case, and when trial in the chosen forum would "establish . . . oppressiveness and vexation to a defendant . . . out of all proportion to plaintiff's convenience," or when the "chosen forum [is] inappropriate because of considerations affecting the court's own administrative and legal problems.'" " Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno , 454 U.S. 235 , 241 , 102 S.Ct. 252 , 258 , 70 L.Ed.2d 419 (1981), quotin

1998In another case, the United States Supreme Court, applying the forum non conveniens doctrine, said a transfer under that doctrine is proper when: "`an alternative forum has jurisdiction to hear the case, and when trial in the chosen forum would "establish . . . oppressiveness and vexation to a defendant . . . out of all proportion to plaintiff's convenience," or when the "chosen forum [is] inappropriate because of considerations affecting the court's own administrative and legal problems.'" " Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno , 454 U.S. 235 , 241 , 102 S.Ct. 252 , 258 , 70 L.Ed.2d 419 (1981), quotin

2025That doctrine is codified in § 6-5-430, Ala. Code 1975, which provides, in pertinent part: "Whenever … a claim … has arisen outside of this state against any person or corporation, such claim may be enforceable in the courts of this state in any county in which jurisdiction of the defendant can be legally obtained in the same manner in which jurisdiction could have been obtained if the claim had arisen in this state; provided, however, the courts of this state shall apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens in determining whether to accept or decline to take jurisdiction of an action based up

2013See, e.g., Ex parte United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, 688 So.2d 246 (Ala. 1997); Ex paHe Preston Hood Chevrolet, Inc., 638 So.2d 842 (Ala.1994); Ex parte Employers Ins. of Wausau, 590 So.2d 888 (Ala.1991); Ex paHe Allied-Signal, Inc., 561 So.2d 1062 (Ala.1990); Ex paHe Auto-Owners Ins.

2013In Ex parte First Family Financial Services, Inc., 718 So.2d 658, 661 (AIa.1998), this Court noted: “ “Important considerations are the relative ease of access to sources of proof; availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, and the cost of obtaining attendance of willing, witnesses; possibility of view of premises, if view would be appropriate to the action; and all other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious and inexpensive.

2001In First Family , 718 So.2d at 662 , the plaintiff filed the action in the Marengo Circuit Court and the defendant *Page 832 moved for a transfer to the Dallas Circuit Court.

2001Co., 725 So.2d 955 (Ala. 1998), regarding the doctrine of forum non conveniens, are controlling in this case.

2001Co. , 725 So.2d 955 (Ala. 1998), regarding the doctrine of forum non conveniens , are controlling in this case.

2025That doctrine is codified in § 6-5-430, Ala. Code 1975, which provides, in pertinent part: "Whenever … a claim … has arisen outside of this state against any person or corporation, such claim may be enforceable in the courts of this state in any county in which jurisdiction of the defendant can be legally obtained in the same manner in which jurisdiction could have been obtained if the claim had arisen in this state; provided, however, the courts of this state shall apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens in determining whether to accept or decline to take jurisdiction of an action based up

2013See, e.g., Ex parte United Bhd. of Carpenters & Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, 688 So.2d 246 (Ala. 1997); Ex paHe Preston Hood Chevrolet, Inc., 638 So.2d 842 (Ala.1994); Ex parte Employers Ins. of Wausau, 590 So.2d 888 (Ala.1991); Ex paHe Allied-Signal, Inc., 561 So.2d 1062 (Ala.1990); Ex paHe Auto-Owners Ins.

2017Although we review a ruling on a motion to transfer to determine whether the trial court exceeded its discretion in granting or denying the motion, id. , where "the convenience of the parties and witnesses or the interest of justice would be best served by a transfer, § 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, compels the trial court to transfer the action to the alternative forum." Ex parte First Tennessee Bank Nat'l Ass'n , 994 So.2d 906 , 912 (Ala. 2008) (emphasis added).' " Ex parte Wachovia Bank, N.A. , 77 So.3d 570 , 573 (Ala. 2011). " ' "The purpose of the doctrine of forum non conveniens is to 'preve

2016Although we review a ruling on 'a motion to transfer to determine whether the trial court exceeded its discretion in granting or denying the motion, id. where ‘the convenience, of the parties and witnesses or the interest of justice would be best served by a transfer, § 6-3-21.1, Ala. Code 1975, compels the trial court to transfer the action to the alternative forum.’ Ex parte First Tennessee Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 994 So.2d 906, 912 (Ala.2008) (emphasis added).” Ex parte Wachovia Bank, N.A., 77 So.3d 570, 573 (Ala.2011). “ ‘The purpose of the doctrine of forum non conveniens is to “prevent the was

2018See § 6-3-21.1(b), Ala. Code 1975 ("The right of a party to move for a change or transfer of venue pursuant to this statute is cumulative and in addition to the rights of a party to move for a change or transfer of venue pursuant to Section 6-3-20, Section 6-3-21, or Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure."); Ex parte Ford Motor Co. , 47 So.3d 234 , 240 n.5 (Ala. 2010) ("[N]othing prevents a defendant ... from filing a motion to transfer based on both grounds[, i.e., (improper venue and the doctrine of forum non conveniens),] as alternative arguments ....").

2018See § 6-3-21.1(b), Ala. Code 1975 ("The right of a party to move for a change or transfer of venue pursuant to this statute is cumulative and in addition to the rights of a party to move for a change or transfer of venue pursuant to Section 6-3-20, Section 6-3-21, or Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure."); Ex parte Ford Motor Co. , 47 So.3d 234 , 240 n.5 (Ala. 2010) ("[N]othing prevents a defendant ... from filing a motion to transfer based on both grounds[, i.e., (improper venue and the doctrine of forum non conveniens),] as alternative arguments ....").

2016Specifically, this Court has stated that “[a] defendant may move the court for a change of venue based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens even when this ground is not raised in the initial pleading.” Ex parte Harper, 934 So.2d 1045, 1048 (Ala.2006).