Section Newsletters

Articles on Forum Non Conveniens

Court rejects res judicata but upholds dismissal based on forum non conveniens issues By Nigel Smith Civil Practice and Procedure, February 2015 The issue in Bjorkstam v. MPC Products Corp., was whether plaintiffs were entitled to reinstate their complaint against defendants after the circuit court had originally dismissed it based on forum non conveniens and their refiled Texas suit had then been dismissed with prejudice for lack of proper service.
Fifth District issues new Forum Non Conveniens opinion By David Cates Tort Law, June 2012 A summary of the decision in Fennell v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, issued earlier this year.
Forum non Conveniens clarified: Glass v. DOT Transportation, Inc. By Hon. Daniel T. Gillespie & Matthew Friedlander Civil Practice and Procedure, February 2010 For many judges and lawyers in Illinois, the doctrine of forum non conveniens appears to be a convoluted discretionary tool. Unlike a motion to transfer venue, which is a purely procedural matter, the doctrine offorum non conveniens allows the judge to transfer a case if he or she decides that hearing a case in the plaintiff’s choice of forum is unfair to the defendant or the public. The doctrine itself applies on an interstate and intrastate basis so long as venue is proper in both forums.
The Illinois Supreme Court revisits intrastate forum non conveniens in Langenhorst v. Norfolk Southern Railway: “A battle over the minutiae” By Kris R. Murphy Energy, Utilities, Telecommunications, and Transportation, November 2006 In Langenhorst v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, the Supreme Court of Illinois recently revisited the doctrine of intrastate forum non conveniens.
The Illinois Supreme Court revisits intrastate forum non conveniens in Langenhorst v. Norfolk Southern Railway: “A battle over the minutiae” By Kris R. Murphy Civil Practice and Procedure, October 2006 In Langenhorst v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company, 219 Ill.2d 430, 848 N.E.2d 927 (2006), the Supreme Court of Illinois (“the Supreme Court”) recently revisited the doctrine of intrastate forum non conveniens.
An examination of intrastate forum non conveniens in Illinois and the impact of Langenhorst v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company By Randall Edgar General Practice, Solo, and Small Firm, June 2006 Forum non conveniens is a Latin term of art that first-year law students from across the state learn to define in English as “an inconvenient court,” or “inconvenient forum.”
Forum non Madison County By Terrence M. Madsen General Practice, Solo, and Small Firm, November 2003 For those of us who practice outside the world of jury actions for damages in excess of $50,000, it may seem unusual that a plaintiff in a traffic crash case would choose to file the action in a county where neither driver resides, where the accident did not happen and where there are 10 times the number of similar cases pending on the docket and they take, statistically, nearly a year longer to resolve than the county of occurrence.
First National Bank v. Guerine: Illinois Supreme Court sets the standard for intrastate forum non conveniens transfers By Hon. Daniel T. Gillespie Bench and Bar, June 2003 In First National Bank v. Guerine, the Illinois Supreme Court set forth the standards for deciding whether to transfer a case to another county in Illinois for forum non conveniens
First National Bank v. Guerine: Restating the standard for in-state forum non conveniens transfers By Hon. Daniel T. Gillespie Civil Practice and Procedure, February 2003 In First National Bank v. Guerine, the Illinois Supreme Court restated the standard that governs the resolution of motions to transfer a case to another county in Illinois for forum non conveniens

Select a Different Subject