forum non conveniens doctrine in Utah

2012Co., 219 Ill.2d 430 , 302 Ill.Dec. 363 , 848 N.E.2d 927 , 938-39 (2006) ("[Tlhe location of the parties' attorneys is accorded little weight in determining a forum non conveniens motion." (emphasis omitted)); Engstrom v. Bayer Corp., 2004 PA Super. 223, ¶ 13, 855 A.2d 52 (affirming an order in which the trial court noted that the "out-of-state plaintiffs ... chose to file in Philadelphia County for no apparent reason other than the fact that their attorneys have their offices here-a fact of no relevance to a forum non conveniens analysis" (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)).

2012Co., 219 Ill.2d 430 , 302 Ill.Dec. 363 , 848 N.E.2d 927 , 938-39 (2006) ("[Tlhe location of the parties' attorneys is accorded little weight in determining a forum non conveniens motion." (emphasis omitted)); Engstrom v. Bayer Corp., 2004 PA Super. 223, ¶ 13, 855 A.2d 52 (affirming an order in which the trial court noted that the "out-of-state plaintiffs ... chose to file in Philadelphia County for no apparent reason other than the fact that their attorneys have their offices here-a fact of no relevance to a forum non conveniens analysis" (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)).

2012Co., 219 Ill.2d 430 , 302 Ill.Dec. 363 , 848 N.E.2d 927 , 938-39 (2006) ("[Tlhe location of the parties' attorneys is accorded little weight in determining a forum non conveniens motion." (emphasis omitted)); Engstrom v. Bayer Corp., 2004 PA Super. 223, ¶ 13, 855 A.2d 52 (affirming an order in which the trial court noted that the "out-of-state plaintiffs ... chose to file in Philadelphia County for no apparent reason other than the fact that their attorneys have their offices here-a fact of no relevance to a forum non conveniens analysis" (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)).

2011Co., 219 Ill.2d 430 , 302 Ill.Dec. 363 , 848 N.E.2d 927 , 938-39 (2006) ("[T]he location of the parties' attorneys is accorded little weight in determining a forum non conveniens motion." (emphasis omitted)); Engstrom v. Bayer Corp., 2004 PA Super 223, ¶ 13 , 855 A.2d 52 (affirming an order in which the trial court noted that the "out-of-state plaintiffs ... chose to file in Philadelphia County for no apparent reason other than the fact that their attorneys have their offices here—a fact of no relevance to a forum non conveniens analysis" (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)).

2023We need not resolve this dispute, however, because Volonte’s contention fails under both standards. 20210399-CA 12 2023 UT App 25 Volonte v. Domo, Inc. ANALYSIS ¶32 Volonte challenges the district court’s ruling on six grounds. • First, he argues that the FFP was invalid because of a lack of assent and notice. • Second, he argues that the FFP was invalid because of Domo’s Form 8-K. • Third, he argues that the FFP was unenforceable under the promissory and equitable estoppel doctrines. • Fourth, he argues that the FFP conflicts with certain provisions of the Securities Act. • Fifth, he argues t

2023And under this standard of review, a court’s decision to apply (or, as here, not apply) the forum non conveniens doctrine is reversed “only if (1) the district court relied on an erroneous conclusion of law or (2) there was no evidentiary basis for its ruling.” Energy Claims, 2014 UT 13, ¶ 27 (quotation simplified). ¶63 As noted, Volonte made his forum non conveniens argument below for the first time at oral argument on the motion Court explained that the anti-waiver provision at issue in that case “only prohibits waiver of the substantive obligations imposed by the Exchange Act.” Id. at 228.

2019Group Ltd., 2014 UT 13, ¶¶ 33 , 37–41, 325 P.3d 70 (remanding for the district court to consider whether the plaintiff’s choice of forum “was motivated by legitimate reasons” and providing additional guidance as to what the court should consider under the second and third steps of the forum non conveniens analysis); Diversified Striping Sys., Inc. v. Kraus, 2014 UT App 287 , ¶¶ 10–11, 341 P.3d 932 (remanding for the district court to consider the parties’ forum non conveniens arguments in light of the recent clarification of the issue of deference set forth in Energy Claims and to “fully analy

2019Group Ltd., 2014 UT 13, ¶¶ 33 , 37–41, 325 P.3d 70 (remanding for the district court to consider whether the plaintiff’s choice of forum “was motivated by legitimate reasons” and providing additional guidance as to what the court should consider under the second and third steps of the forum non conveniens analysis); Diversified Striping Sys., Inc. v. Kraus, 2014 UT App 287 , ¶¶ 10–11, 341 P.3d 932 (remanding for the district court to consider the parties’ forum non conveniens arguments in light of the recent clarification of the issue of deference set forth in Energy Claims and to “fully analy

1993Still, it was not until the Supreme Court’s decision in M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1 , 92 S.Ct. 1907 , 32 L.Ed.2d 513 (1972), that the “ouster theory” was permanently laid to rest. 4 In Bremen, the Supreme Court wrote: *812 The argument that [forum-selection] clauses are improper because they tend to “oust” a court of jurisdiction is hardly more than a vestigal [sic] legal fiction.

1993Still, it was not until the Supreme Court’s decision in M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1 , 92 S.Ct. 1907 , 32 L.Ed.2d 513 (1972), that the “ouster theory” was permanently laid to rest. 4 In Bremen, the Supreme Court wrote: *812 The argument that [forum-selection] clauses are improper because they tend to “oust” a court of jurisdiction is hardly more than a vestigal [sic] legal fiction.

1950See Canada Malting Co. v. Paterson Steamships, 285 U.S. 413, 422, 423 , 52 S.Ct. 413 , [415], 76 L.Ed. 837 , [842, 843]; Mass. v. Missouri, 308 U.S. 1, 19 , 60 S.Ct. 39 , [43], 84 L.Ed. 3 , [10]; Rogers v. Guaranty Trust Co., 288 U.S. 123, 130, 131 , 53 S.Ct. 295 , [297, 298], 77 L.Ed. 652 , [656, 657], 89 A.L.R. 720 .

1950See Canada Malting Co. v. Paterson Steamships, 285 U.S. 413, 422, 423 , 52 S.Ct. 413 , [415], 76 L.Ed. 837 , [842, 843]; Mass. v. Missouri, 308 U.S. 1, 19 , 60 S.Ct. 39 , [43], 84 L.Ed. 3 , [10]; Rogers v. Guaranty Trust Co., 288 U.S. 123, 130, 131 , 53 S.Ct. 295 , [297, 298], 77 L.Ed. 652 , [656, 657], 89 A.L.R. 720 .

1950Nothing in the history of the 1910 amendment indicates that its framers contemplated any such vast transformation in the established relationship between federal and state courts and in the duty of the federal courts to decline jurisdiction `in the interest of justice.' On the contrary, the expressed considerations of policy underlying the amendment were fundamentally the same as those underlying the equitable power to restrain oppressive suits and the reciprocal doctrine of forum non conveniens: It does not comport with equity and justice to allow a suit to be litigated in a forum where, on t

1950Nothing in the history of the 1910 amendment indicates that its framers contemplated any such vast transformation in the established relationship between federal and state courts and in the duty of the federal courts to decline jurisdiction `in the interest of justice.' On the contrary, the expressed considerations of policy underlying the amendment were fundamentally the same as those underlying the equitable power to restrain oppressive suits and the reciprocal doctrine of forum non conveniens: It does not comport with equity and justice to allow a suit to be litigated in a forum where, on t

1950Co. v. Kepner, 314 U.S. 44 , 62 S.Ct. 6 , 86 L.Ed. 28 , 136 A.L.R. 1222 , together with the A.L.R. notes to these cases) are still valid reasons why this state should not now adopt such a policy of dismissing such cases under the forum non conveniens doctrine in the absence of express statutory provision authorizing that policy.

1950Co. v. Kepner, 314 U.S. 44 , 62 S.Ct. 6 , 86 L.Ed. 28 , 136 A.L.R. 1222 , together with the A.L.R. notes to these cases) are still valid reasons why this state should not now adopt such a policy of dismissing such cases under the forum non conveniens doctrine in the absence of express statutory provision authorizing that policy.

1950"We later expressly said that a state court `may in appropriate cases apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens.' Broderick v. Rosner, 294 U.S. 629, 643 , 55 S.Ct. 589 , [592], 79 L.Ed. 1100 , [1107], 100 A.L.R. 1133 ; Williams v. North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 294, note 5 , 63 S.Ct. 207 , [211], 87 L.Ed. 279 , [283], 143 A.L.R. 1273 .

1950"We later expressly said that a state court `may in appropriate cases apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens.' Broderick v. Rosner, 294 U.S. 629, 643 , 55 S.Ct. 589 , [592], 79 L.Ed. 1100 , [1107], 100 A.L.R. 1133 ; Williams v. North Carolina, 317 U.S. 287, 294, note 5 , 63 S.Ct. 207 , [211], 87 L.Ed. 279 , [283], 143 A.L.R. 1273 .

1950In State v. Mayfield, 1949, 359 Mo. 827 , 224 *352 S.W. 2d 105, decided since the 1848 revision of Title 28 U.S. Code, and the case of Ex parte Collett, 337 U.S. 55 , 69 S.Ct. 944 , 93 L.Ed. 1207 , 10 A.L.R. 2d 921 , the Missouri Supreme Court held that under its statute and the policy established by the F.E.L.A. it was required to take cognizance of such claims of its own citizens and therefore must do the same to citizens of other states under the privileges and immunities clauses of the federal constitution.

1950In State v. Mayfield, 1949, 359 Mo. 827 , 224 *352 S.W. 2d 105, decided since the 1848 revision of Title 28 U.S. Code, and the case of Ex parte Collett, 337 U.S. 55 , 69 S.Ct. 944 , 93 L.Ed. 1207 , 10 A.L.R. 2d 921 , the Missouri Supreme Court held that under its statute and the policy established by the F.E.L.A. it was required to take cognizance of such claims of its own citizens and therefore must do the same to citizens of other states under the privileges and immunities clauses of the federal constitution.

1950In State v. Mayfield, 1949, 359 Mo. 827 , 224 *352 S.W. 2d 105, decided since the 1848 revision of Title 28 U.S. Code, and the case of Ex parte Collett, 337 U.S. 55 , 69 S.Ct. 944 , 93 L.Ed. 1207 , 10 A.L.R. 2d 921 , the Missouri Supreme Court held that under its statute and the policy established by the F.E.L.A. it was required to take cognizance of such claims of its own citizens and therefore must do the same to citizens of other states under the privileges and immunities clauses of the federal constitution.

1950In State v. Mayfield, 1949, 359 Mo. 827 , 224 S. W. 2d 105 , decided since the 1848 revision of Title 28 U. S. Code, and the case of Ex parte Collett, 337 U. S. 55, 69 S. Ct. 944 , 93 L.

1950Schendel v. McGee, 8 Cir. 300 F. 273 ; Southern R.

1950Schendel v. McGee, 8 Cir. 300 F. 273 ; Southern R.

1950Co. 25 Cal.2d 605 , 155 P.2d 42, 44 , *329 decided in December, 1944, held that a state court having jurisdiction of actions under the Federal Employers' Liability Act may not refuse to act on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

1950Co. 25 Cal.2d 605 , 155 P.2d 42, 44 , *329 decided in December, 1944, held that a state court having jurisdiction of actions under the Federal Employers' Liability Act may not refuse to act on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

1950We assigned the case for hearing on this motion. 1948, 335 U.S. 897 , 69 S.Ct. 296 [ 93 L.Ed. 432 ]." We have attempted to set out the important United States Supreme Court cases dealing with the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

1950We assigned the case for hearing on this motion. 1948, 335 U.S. 897 , 69 S.Ct. 296 [ 93 L.Ed. 432 ]." We have attempted to set out the important United States Supreme Court cases dealing with the doctrine of forum non conveniens.