No Costs for You, Appellate Court Rules in Inconvenient Forum Matter
Winning a dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds does not count as a "judgment" for costs purposes, the Third District Court of Appeal ruled.
November 29, 2017 at 02:35 PM
3 minute read
Litigants are not entitled to costs when a case is dismissed to be heard in a more convenient forum, a Florida appellate court ruled Wednesday.
The Third District Court of Appeal reversed a Miami judge's costs award to Toyota subsidiaries after the case was dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds. Moving a case to another country's courts does not count as a “judgment” for costs purposes, the panel ruled, noting the question had not been directly addressed before by Florida courts.
“An order granting dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds resolves a procedural issue, not a substantive issue in the case,” Third DCA Chief Judge Leslie Rothenberg wrote, with Judges Kevin Emas and Edwin Scales concurring. “Liability has yet to be determined.”
Forum non conveniens is a significant issue for many cases in the court's jurisdiction because of the amount of international litigation in Miami, often called the capital of Latin America.
In this case, Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Eric William Hendon dismissed Panamanian citizens Isabel and Eugenio Magdalena's personal injury lawsuit against the Japanese automaker, finding the case should be brought in Panama or Japan rather than the U.S. The judge granted Toyota's motion to tax costs, finding the automaker was entitled to the award as the “prevailing party.”
The Magdalenas sued Toyota for negligence and breach of warranty after an air bag allegedly failed to deploy when Eugenio Magdalena got into a crash. Spinal injuries left Magdalena partially paralyzed.
The court found that case law called into question whether Toyota was a “prevailing party” under the statute. But regardless of whether the “prevailing party” standard applies, the trial court erred by awarding costs because no judgment was entered, the panel ruled.
“A dismissal on the ground of forum non conveniens is not a judgment or ruling on the merits of the claims against Toyota, but rather a ruling which merely provides that another forum is more convenient and would best serve the ends of justice,” the judges wrote.
There is still a chance that the forum question could lead to Toyota recovering costs down the line, the court noted. The case has been refiled in Panama.
“Although the forum issue was hotly debated and extensively litigated, and may, at the end of the litigation, be determined to have been a 'significant issue' upon which Toyota prevailed, resolution of whether Toyota may recover its costs litigating that issue is premature,” the judges wrote.
Toyota is represented by Stephanie Simm, John Seipp Jr.,and Donald Blackwell of Bowman and Brooke in Coral Gables.
The Magdalenas are represented by Luis Llamas of Fowler Rodriguez, who works out of New Orleans and Coral Gables.
The attorneys did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFlorida Supreme Court Paves Way for Attorney Fees Over $100k in Land Dispute
Miami’s Arbitration Week Aims To Cement City’s Status as Dispute Destination
3 minute readHit Song Ignites Multimillion-Dollar Legal Battle in South Florida
Ex-Big Law Attorney Disbarred for Defrauding $1 Million of Client Money
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250