CORDIS CORPORATION
v.
ASHLEY K. MCCALL, ETC.
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.
Cordis Corporation appealed a trial court's denial of its motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens in a product liability suit brought by the personal representative of Mark McCall's estate. The plaintiff alleged that defects in Cordis's IVC filter caused the decedent's injuries and death. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the forum non conveniens motion. The court's analysis of the relevant forum non conveniens factors supported the denial, and the decision to grant or deny such a motion properly rests within the trial court's sound discretion.
[1] The determination whether to grant or deny a motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens rests within the sound discretion of the trial court and is reviewed…
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 intelligenceMark McCall was implanted with a Cordis TrapEase Permanent Inferior Vena Cava Filter while a resident of Arizona. Ashley K. McCall, the personal repre…
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 Forum Non Conveniens cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed July 14, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________ No. 3D20-1673 Lower Tribunal No. 18-41876 ________________
Cordis Corporation,
Appellant,
vs.
Ashley K. McCall, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Mark McCall, Appellee.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, David C. Miller, Judge. Crowell & Moring LLP, and Vincent J. Galluzzo (Washington, D.C.); and Wallen Kelley, and John D. Golden, for appellant. Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A., and Joseph R. Johnson (West Palm Beach), for appellee. Before HENDON, MILLER, and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Cordis Corporation (“Cordis”) appeals from a non-final order denying its motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non-conveniens. We affirm.
The plaintiff, Ashley K. McCall, is the substituted plaintiff and the personal representative of the deceased, Mark McCall, who originally filed this case. The plaintiff is a citizen and resident of the state of Arizona.1 The plaintiff brought a product liability suit against Cordis, alleging that defects in the Cordis TrapEase Permanent Inferior Vena Cava Filter (“Cordis IVC Filter”) caused Mark McCall’s injuries and death. Cordis is a Florida corporation and maintains an office in Miami Lakes, Florida.
Cordis’s Miami Lakes office is the central location for handling product complaints, quality control, risk management, training, and regulatory compliance involving the Cordis IVC Filter. Following a hearing, the trial court denied Cordis’s motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens. Based on our review of the record, including the trial court’s order addressing each of the forum non conveniens factors,2 we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its 1 At the time of the Cordis IVC Filter implantation, Mark McCall was a citizen and resident of the state of Arizona. At other relevant times, Mark McCall was a citizen and resident of the state of Missouri. 2 The analysis for forum non conveniens is well established in Florida law. See Cortez v. Palace Resorts, 123 So. 3d 1085 (Fla. 2013); Kinney Sys., Inc. v. Cont’l Ins. Co., 674 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1996); Abeid-Saba v. Carnival discretion in denying the motion. As such, we affirm the order under review.
Aerolineas Argentinas, S.A. v. Gimenez, 807 So. 2d 111, 113 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (stating that decision to grant or deny a forum non conveniens motion for dismissal rests in the sound discretion of the trial court).
Affirmed.
Corp., 184 So. 3d 593, 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Telemundo Network Grp., LLC v. Azteca Int'l Corp., 957 So. 2d 705, 709 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.061(a).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Am. Foundry v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue, 536 F.2d 289 (9th Cir. 1976)…ALFRED T. GOODWIN, Circuit Judge: Corporate and individual taxpayers appeal three Tax Court judgments which sustained deficiency determinations of the Commissioner. The Tax Court decisions are reported at 59 T.C. 231 (1972). We affirm in part and reverse in part. Taxpayers are American Foundry, a close corporation; Dominic Meaglia, the corporation’s founder, a majority stockholder, and ex-president; and Katie Meaglia, Dominic’s wife. American Foundry made paym…
Authorities Cited
- Kinney Sys., Inc. v. The Cont'l Ins. Co., 674 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1996)
- Shahla M. Rabie Cortez v. Palace Resorts, Inc., 123 So. 3d 1085 (Fla. 2013)
- Aerolineas Argentinas, S.A. v. Gimenez, 807 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Telemundo Network Grp., LLC v. Azteca Int'l Corp., 957 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- Abeid-Saba v. Carnival Corp., 184 So. 3d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)