Gravenor-Reuter, R. v. Acme Markets
580 EDA 2024
Pa. Super. Ct.Mar 11, 2025Background
- Robin Gravenor-Reuter, a Delaware resident, sued Acme Markets, Inc. in Philadelphia County after slipping and falling at an Acme store in Smyrna, Delaware.
- Plaintiffs alleged Acme, whose headquarters are in Pennsylvania, failed to maintain safe premises, causing Gravenor-Reuter a serious brain injury; her spouse claimed loss of consortium.
- Acme filed a motion to dismiss the case for forum non conveniens, arguing Delaware was the proper forum, given the location of the accident, parties, witnesses, and evidence.
- Plaintiffs opposed, citing Acme's Pennsylvania headquarters and decision-making as supporting Pennsylvania's interest and convenience as the forum.
- The trial court granted Acme’s motion, finding Delaware was a more appropriate forum; plaintiffs appealed.
- The Superior Court reviewed whether the trial court abused its discretion in granting dismissal for forum non conveniens.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard under § 5322(e) | Trial court improperly used a lesser standard, favoring convenience over substantial justice | Delaware is more appropriate for substantial justice—site, parties, evidence all in DE | Trial court properly weighed public/private factors, no abuse of discretion |
| Connection to PA | Acme’s corporate decisions and headquarters are in PA; policies/procedures at issue originate there | The accident, plaintiff’s residence/treatment, and witnesses are all in DE | Minimal connection to PA; DE forum is more appropriate |
| Evidence & Witnesses | Corporate designee and documents are in PA and can be compelled | Non-expert witnesses and evidence are in DE; Philadelphia court lacks subpoena power | DE access to evidence/witnesses is easier; favors DE forum |
| Public Interest Factors | PA courts have an interest in cases involving PA companies/policies | PA court congestion, minimal relation to PA, burdensome to local jurors | DE interest and judicial efficiency warrant DE forum |
Key Cases Cited
- Zappala v. Brandolini Property Mgmt., Inc., 909 A.2d 1272 (Pa. 2006) (distinguishing between forum non conveniens and venue)
- Failor v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc., 248 A.3d 527 (Pa. Super. 2021) (forum non conveniens burden and review)
- Rahn v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 254 A.3d 738 (Pa. Super. 2021) (forum non conveniens doctrine explained)
- Lyndes v. Penn Central Corp., 254 A.3d 725 (Pa. Super. 2021) (weighting of public and private factors under forum non conveniens)
- Hunter v. Shire US, Inc., 992 A.2d 891 (Pa. Super. 2010) (PA public interest where corporate decisions arise from PA)
- Wright v. Aventis Pasteur, Inc., 905 A.2d 544 (Pa. Super. 2006) (PA public interest for PA-based corporate decision-making)
- Vaughn Estate v. Olympus Am., Inc., 208 A.3d 66 (Pa. Super. 2019) (similar public interest analysis)