LUIS GUERRA, APPELLANT,
v.
SELSDON MARITIME CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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.
Florida appellate court affirmed dismissal of a Chilean seaman's Jones Act injury claim under the forum non conveniens doctrine, holding that Florida state courts may apply this doctrine to maritime employment injury actions.
Forum non conveniens is applicable to Jones Act claims in Florida state courts, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing this action.
[1] Forum non conveniens doctrine is applicable to Jones Act claims brought in Florida state courts despite the federal maritime law right to sue under the Jones Act.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA Chilean seaman employed by Selsdon Maritime Corporation sued his employer in Florida state court for personal injuries sustained while the vessel wa…
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 Discretionary Dismissal cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The plaintiff below, a Chilean seaman, appeals from the dismissal under the forum non conveniens doctrine of an action against his employer for personal injuries allegedly sustained while their vessel was under repair in Virginia. Even if, as the appellant argues, the action is properly maintainable under the Jones Act on the principle adopted in Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 398 U.S. 306, 90 S.Ct. 1731, 26 L.Ed.2d 252 (1970) and Rojas v. Kloster Cruise, A/S, 550 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), review denied, 562 So. 2d 346 (1990), the trial court correctly concluded that forum non conveniens is applicable to such an action in the Florida state courts, In re Air Crash Disaster Near New Orleans, La., 821 F. 2d 1147 (5th Cir.1987), vacated on other grounds, 490 U.S. 1032, 109 S.Ct. 1928, 104 L.Ed.2d 400 (1989); Armadora Naval Dominicana v. Garcia, 478 So. 2d 873, 877 n. 6 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); but cf. Szumlicz v. Norwegian America Line, Inc., 698 F. 2d 1192 (11th Cir.1983), and did not abuse its discretion in finding that dismissal was appropriate in this particular instance. Kinney Sys., Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co., 674 So. 2d 86 (Fla.1996); Resorts Int'l Inc. v. Spinola, 70S So. 2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Armadora, 478 So. 2d at 873.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
David M. Dresdner, M.D., P.A. v. The Charter OAK Fire Ins. Co., 972 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…rendition date of the order to be appealed by a clerk’s stamp that was difficult to read and by misinformation concerning the rendition date furnished to the secretary by an employee in the clerk’s office); Rosso v. Golden Surf Towers Condo. Ass’n, 711 So. 2d 1298, 1300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion to vacate under rule 1.540(b) where the moving party did not receive a copy of the order until it was too late to file a notice of appeal). Unlike Ther…
-
Hialeah Hotel, Inc. v. Woods, 778 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…appeal has run, due process requires that the order be reentered so that the adversely affected party can file a notice of appeal. See Durando v. Palm Beach County, 719 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Rosso v. Golden Surf Towers Condominium Assoc., 711 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Kanecke v. Lennar Homes, Inc., 543 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Southeastern Fidelity Ins. Co. v. Truck Ins. Exchange, 521 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Spanish Oaks Condominium Assoc., Inc. v. Compson of Florida, Inc., 453 S…
-
Burt Kroner v. Singer Asset Fin. Co., L.L.C., 814 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…or discharged ... or it is no longer equitable that the judgment or decree should have prospective application. A trial court has broad discretion in determining whether to grant relief from a judgment. See Rosso v. Golden Surf Towers Condo. Ass’n, 711 So. 2d 1298, 1300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Schwab & Co., Inc. v. Breezy Bay, Inc., 360 So. 2d 117, 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). Likewise, we review orders of the trial court on such motions for abuse of discretion. See Bakalarz v. Luskin, 560 So. 2d 283, 285 (Fla. 4th D…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 398 U.S. 306 (U.S. 1970)
- Kinney Sys., Inc. v. The Cont'l Ins. Co., 674 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1996)
- In re AIR Crash Disaster Near NEW Orleans v. PAN Am. World Airways, Inc., 821 F.2d 1147 (5th Cir. 1987)
- Ryszard Szumlicz v. Norwegian Am. Line, Inc., 698 F.2d 1192 (11th Cir. 1983)
- Armadora Naval Dominicana, S.A. v. Garcia, 478 So. 2d 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Corpus Christi Taxpayers Assn. v. City of Corpus Christi, 490 U.S. 1032 (U.S. 1989)
- Eckles v. Oregon, 490 U.S. 1032 (U.S. 1989)
- Rojas v. Kloster Cruise, 550 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)