JACK SCOTT MURDOCH, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
A.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that a case cannot be dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds if any party is a Florida resident, and that leave to amend should be granted early in proceedings.
Plaintiffs appealed the trial court's dismissal of their action against asbestos manufacturers based on forum non conveniens and denial of leave to am…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Leave To Amend cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Jack Scott Murdoch and his wife Gloria Murdoch, plaintiffs below, appeal the entry of the trial court’s order dismissing their action against several asbestos manufacturers based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens, and denying them leave to amend their complaint. We reverse both orders.
It is established Florida law that “a case may be dismissed from the Florida courts in favor of a more convenient forum in another state only where none of the parties involved in the suit are residents of this state.” Seaboard Coast Line R.R. v. Swain, 362 So. 2d 17, 18 (Fla.1978) (emphasis added); see also Houston v. Caldwell, 359 So. 2d 858, 861 (Fla.1978); Piper Aircraft Corp. Schwendemann, 578 So. 2d 319, 320 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Sempe v. Coordinated Caribbean Transport, Inc., 363 So. 2d 194, 197 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 372 So. 2d 467 (Fla.1979). In the instant case, the record reflects that at least one of the defendant corporations has its principal place of business in Florida. Therefore, it was inappropriate for the trial court to dismiss the case on forum non conveniens grounds.
Additionally, the trial court erred in denying the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend their complaint. At this early point in the proceeding, justice requires that the plaintiffs be given leave to amend their complaint because it has not been shown that they have abused the amendment privilege and the deficiency in the complaint is one which can be cured by an amendment. Montero v. Compugraphic Corp., 531 So. 2d 1034, 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Bowen v. Aetna Life and Casualty Co., 512 So. 2d 248, 250 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).
Accordingly, we reverse the orders under appeal and remand with directions to grant leave to all parties to amend their pleadings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Houston v. Caldwell, 359 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 1978)
- Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Myrtice Mae Swain, 362 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1978)
- Sempe v. Coordinated Caribbean Transp., Inc., 363 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Labrada v. State, 531 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Montero v. Compugraphic Corp., 531 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Joseph Bowen and his spouse v. AETNA Life & Cas. Co., 512 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Piper Aircraft Corp. v. Anneliese Schwendemann, 578 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)