Motion for Forum Non Conveniens in Texas

What Is a Motion for Forum Non Conveniens?

Background

Forum non conveniens provides a trial court with the discretionary authority to decline jurisdiction when another more convenient and suitable forum exists and the convenience of the parties and justice so require. (In re Mahindra, USA Inc., 549 S.W.3d 541, 544 (Tex. 2018).) When the two forums are in Texas, forum non conveniens principles are built into the Texas general venue statute. (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 15.002(b).) This statute authorizes a court to transfer a cause to another Texas court for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. (Id.)

How to Structure the Motion

A defendant seeking dismissal via forum non conveniens bears a heavy burden in opposing the plaintiff’s chosen forum. (Quixtar Inc. v. Signature Mgmt. Team, LLC, 315 S.W.3d 28, 31 (Tex. 2010).)

While this heavy burden applies when the plaintiff is a Texas resident, the forum non conveniens doctrine affords less deference to the plaintiff’s choice of forum when the plaintiff is a nonresident of Texas. (Quixtar Inc. v. Signature Mgmt. Team, LLC, 315 S.W.3d 28, 31–33 (Tex. 2010).) A nonresident plaintiff’s choice deserves some deference, but the defendant’s burden is less stringent. (Id.)

A motion for stay or dismissal must be filed no later than the time required for filing a motion to transfer venue. (Tex. R. Civ. P. 86(1).) Objections to the court’s jurisdiction under forum non conveniens doctrine are waived unless filed by this time. (Id.)

The party seeking the stay, dismissal, or transfer must prove all of the following elements

A forum outside Texas is a more appropriate forum that (a) offers a remedy, (b) can exercise jurisdiction over all parties and claims properly joined in the action by the claimant; and (c) would provide a place of trial that is fair, reasonable, and convenient to the parties.
Maintenance of the action in the courts of Texas would work a substantial injustice to the party invoking the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
The balance of the private interests of all the parties and the public interest of the state predominates in favor of the action being brought in the other forum.
The stay or dismissal would not, in reasonable probability, result in unreasonable duplication or proliferation of litigation.

(Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 71.051(b).)

The Court’s Decision

In determining whether to dismiss a case under forum non conveniens, the trial court must weight various public and private factors.

The private factors include:

the relative ease of access to sources of proof;
The availability of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling witnesses;
The cost of obtaining attendance from willing witnesses;
The possibility of a view of the premises;
The enforceability of a judgment once obtained; and;
All other practical problems that make trial of a case easy, expeditious, and inexpensive.

The public factors include:

Administrative difficulties for courts when litigation is piled up in congested centers rather than being handled at its origin;
The burden of jury duty that ought not be imposed on the people of a community that has no relation to the litigation;
Local interest in having localized controversies decided at home; and
Avoiding conflicts of law.

(Quixtar Inc. v. Signature Management Team, LLC, 315 S.W.3d 28, 33–34 (Tex. 2010); Flaiz v. Moore, 359 S.W.2d 872, 874–875 (Tex. 1962); Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508, 67 S. Ct. 839, 91 L. Ed. 1055 (1947)); Direct Color Servs., Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 929 S.W.2d 558, 563 (Tex. App. 1996).)