GLF Construction Corp. v. Credinform International, S.A.
225 So. 3d 377
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Credinform (Bolivian insurer) sued GLF Construction Corp. (Florida corporation, subsidiary of Italian Grandi Lavori) in Miami for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, aiding and abetting, and FDUTPA after paying nearly $15 million on bonds for the Misicuni Dam Project in Bolivia.
- The Misicuni project was led by a consortium (CHM) that required an Italian company to hold a 51% leadership interest; Grandi Lavori was the Italian lead but GLF (its Florida subsidiary) was involved in U.S. communications and banking.
- Key acts: powers of attorney executed in Rome and in the Bolivian embassy in Miami; Rovira (Bolivian) obtained bonds from Credinform after communications identifying Grandi Lavori as CHM’s 51% participant; some CHM funds were wired into GLF’s Miami account.
- Credinform alleges GLF employees/agents (including Senis and Rovira) made misrepresentations from Florida that induced issuance of bonds.
- GLF moved to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds, arguing Italy is the proper forum and that the real defendant is Grandi Lavori; trial court denied the motion, finding private factors favored Florida (or were at equipoise) and public factors favored Florida.
- appellate court affirmed, holding the trial court properly applied Kinney and Rule 1.061(a) and did not abuse its discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal for forum non conveniens is required because Italy is an adequate and more convenient forum | Credinform chose Florida; its claims arise from misrepresentations made in and connected to Florida | GLF: Italy is the adequate and more appropriate forum; evidence/witnesses mostly in Italy; suit targets Italian parent in disguise | Court: Italy is an adequate forum, but private factors favor Florida or are in equipoise; dismissal denied |
| Whether Credinform sued GLF to forum-shop instead of suing Grandi Lavori | Credinform contends GLF made independent misrepresentations from Florida inducing bond issuance | GLF contends Credinform only named GLF to obtain a Florida forum and that Grandi Lavori is the real defendant | Court: Complaint alleges sufficient, well-pleaded facts that GLF itself made actionable representations; forum-shopping claim insufficient to overcome plaintiff’s forum choice |
| Whether the trial court properly weighed private interest factors (including defendant’s burden) | Credinform: private factors (contacts, evidence in Florida) support keeping case here | GLF: trial court ignored GLF’s defense burdens and concentrated on plaintiff’s proof; burden to defend is heavy if held in Florida | Court: trial court considered both sides; presumption for plaintiff’s forum not overcome; no abuse of discretion |
| Whether public interest factors favor retaining Florida jurisdiction | Credinform: litigation has substantial nexus with Florida (corporate seat, acts, banking, communications) | GLF: public factors favor Italy; court supposedly did not analyze public factors properly | Court: public factors examined and favor Florida due to nexus, local acts, and governing law; no abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Kinney Sys., Inc. v. Cont’l Ins. Co., 674 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1996) (establishes Florida forum non conveniens factors adopted into Rule 1.061)
- Ryder Sys., Inc. v. Davis, 997 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (standard of review: abuse of discretion on denial of forum non conveniens)
- Cardoso v. FPB Bank, 870 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (noting oddity of forum non conveniens defense by defendant sued where it resides)
- Cortez v. Palace Resorts, Inc., 123 So. 3d 1085 (Fla. 2013) (public interest requires assessing nexus to chosen forum)
- Publicidad Vepaco, C.A. v. Mezerhane, 176 So. 3d 273 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (presumption for plaintiff’s forum and foreign plaintiff’s entitlement to some deference)
- Rolls‑Royce, Inc. v. Garcia, 77 So. 3d 855 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (public interest must be analyzed when private factors are near equipoise)
- Lehman v. Humphrey Cayman, Ltd., 713 F.2d 339 (8th Cir. 1983) (defendant’s residence as a factor making domestic forum less burdensome)