Practice point: The doctrine permits a court to stay or dismiss
an action when, although it may have jurisdiction over a claim, the
court determines that, in the interest of substantial justice, the action
should be heard in another forum, pursuant to CPLR 327[a]. On a motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens, the defendant bears the burden to demonstrate relevant private or
public interest factors which militate against accepting the litigation.
Student note: On such a motion,
the court will weigh the parties' residencies, the location of
the witnesses and any hardship caused by the choice of forum, the
availability of an alternative forum, the situs of the action, and the burden on the New York court system. No single factor is dispositive.
Case: Boyle v. Starwood Hotels, NY Slip Op 06830 (2d Dept. 2013).
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: Objections to an invoice as a defense to an account stated claim.
