FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W226467177> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W226467177 startingPage "321" @default.
• W226467177 abstract "I. INTRODUCTION As a moth is drawn to the light, so is a litigant drawn to the United States. If he can only get his case into their courts, he stands to win a fortune. (1) On March 5, 2007, the United States Supreme Court resolved the split among the circuit courts as to whether a federal court must first establish its own jurisdiction before dismissing a suit using the forum non conveniens doctrine. (2) Speaking for a unanimous Supreme Court, Justice Ginsburg reversed the Third Court of Appeals' judgment, (3) holding that because the resol[ution of] a forum non conveniens motion does not entail any assumption by the court of substantive 'law-declaring power,' (4) a federal court has discretion to respond at once to a defendant's forum non conveniens plea, and need not take up first any other threshold objection. (5) Having returned an arrow to the district courts' quivers, (6) Justice Ginsburg noted that [t]his is a textbook case for immediate forum non conveniens because determining subject-matter jurisdiction presented an issue of first impression in the Third Circuit and determining personal jurisdiction would have required extensive discovery burden[ing the defendant] with expense and delay. (7) Under the federal doctrine of forum non conveniens, a court may dismiss a case where the inconvenience of the selected forum to the defendant and the court significantly exceeds its convenience to the plaintiff. (8) Given the Supreme Court's opinion in Sinochem International reaffirming the discretionary power a trial court wields in exercising this common law tool, it is incumbent on the parties litigating a dispute to have a full-fledged and working knowledge of how to facilitate a trial court in arming, or disarming, their proverbial bows with a forum non conveniens arrow. This Note will primarily address this topic from a defense counsel perspective; the insights offered, however, can be invaluable to the plaintiffs bar as well. While offering a descriptive view of the current state of the forum non conveniens doctrine, chiefly within the Second Circuit, the author will, on occasion, reference scholarly works by other authors who offer either their critiques or normative judgments of the doctrine; but it should be kept in mind that the aim of this Note is practical, not critical. Because of forum non conveniens' continuing application in federal cases, for the most part, where the alternative forum is abroad, this Note will assume a situation where a foreign plaintiff has brought suit against either an international or domestic defendant within the United States. (9) Also to be taken into account is that the case law adduced throughout this Note will be, for the most part, federal, and thus distinct from any common law or statutory enactments by the individual states of the forum non conveniens doctrine. (10) This Note will begin by exploring the history of the doctrine from its inception in state courts, to its formal recognition by the Supreme Court, and all of the way up to its present-day status. Next, this Note will examine the Sinochem International decision and delve into the practicalities and enduring problems that may arise, while proposing ideas that will expedite litigation on forum non conveniens dismissals. Lastly, this Note will focus specifically on cases brought within the Second Circuit. In so doing, the Second Circuit's standard will be reviewed both at the trial court and appellate court levels. In particular, this Note will examine how Second courts have addressed areas of the doctrine left open for interpretation by the Supreme Court as well as how its courts have finessed the Supreme Court's standard in the aftermath of Sinochem International. This last section will offer suggestions that defense counsel should consider both in advance of making a forum non conveniens dismissal motion and during the motion's consideration by the court; ultimately the goal will be to increase the prospects for dismissal and lessen the possibility of plaintiffs success upon an appeal. …" @default.
• W226467177 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W226467177 creator A5075185353 @default.
• W226467177 date "2009-01-01" @default.
• W226467177 modified "2023-09-28" @default.
• W226467177 title "The Forum Non Conveniens Motion and the Death of the Moth: A Defense Perspective in the Post-Sinochem Era" @default.
• W226467177 hasPublicationYear "2009" @default.
• W226467177 type Work @default.
• W226467177 sameAs 226467177 @default.
• W226467177 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W226467177 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W226467177 hasAuthorship W226467177A5075185353 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C110346835 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C136576888 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C2776211767 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C2776949292 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C2777632292 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C2777886440 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C50688660 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C66487177 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C87501996 @default.
• W226467177 hasConcept C97460637 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C110346835 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C136576888 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C17744445 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C199539241 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C2776211767 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C2776949292 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C2777632292 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C2777886440 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C2778272461 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C50688660 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C66487177 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C87501996 @default.
• W226467177 hasConceptScore W226467177C97460637 @default.
• W226467177 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W226467177 hasLocation W2264671771 @default.
• W226467177 hasOpenAccess W226467177 @default.
• W226467177 hasPrimaryLocation W2264671771 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W2159667388 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W2229351942 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W2252565192 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W2280314908 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W254555521 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W259013233 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W2617361111 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W263224796 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W282324106 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W286804805 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W29922203 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W3041103481 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W3123007928 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W3123542812 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W3125688436 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W3164407776 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W64545260 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W72818983 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W825364578 @default.
• W226467177 hasRelatedWork W1950340894 @default.
• W226467177 hasVolume "72" @default.
• W226467177 isParatext "false" @default.
• W226467177 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W226467177 magId "226467177" @default.
• W226467177 workType "article" @default.