In Re ELAMEX, S.A. De C v. Elamex USA, Corp., and Mount Franklin Foods, L.L.C
367 S.W.3d 879
| Tex. App. | 2012

Background

  • This is an original mandamus petition seeking to compel a Texas court to sever and dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds; the court denied relief.
  • Relators are Elamex, S.A. de C.V. (Elamex Mexico), Elamex USA, Corp. (Elamex USA), and Mount Franklin Foods, LLC (MFF).
  • Plaintiffs in the underlying suit are Dulces Arbor, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Dulces Arbor) and Blueberry Sales, LLP (Blueberry Sales); Dulces Arbor claims ownership of a Mexican candy-manufacturing plant and related property.
  • The Mexican real property at issue is in Cuidad Juarez, Mexico, and Dulces Arbor asserts ownership financed by lenders including Bank of the West (WestStar Bank).
  • The personal property (machinery and computers) was leased from C Leasing and installed on the Mexican property, later acquired by Blueberry Sales.
  • The underlying live petition pleads fraud, tortious interference, breach of contract and related theories, including alter ego and conspiracy; mandamus targets the denial of severance and dismissal under forum non conveniens.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Severance of claims was proper. Real-Parties-in-Interest argue interwoven facts justify unitary proceeding. Relators contend severance prevents prejudice and inefficiency. No abuse of discretion; court could reasonably conclude non-severance was appropriate.
Forum non conveniens dismissal warranted? Relators contend Juárez violence makes Mexico inadequate forum; Gulf Oil factors favor dismissal. Real-Parties-in-Interest argue continued Texas forum is appropriate; trial court’s reasons unclear but factors support denial. No abuse of discretion; court did not err in denying dismissal under Gulf Oil factors.

Key Cases Cited

  • Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124 (Tex. 2004) (mandamus review; abuse of discretion standard; adequate remedy by appeal)
  • Cerberus Capital Mgmt., L.P. v., 164 S.W.3d 379 (Tex. 2005) (abuse of discretion; legal principles control ruling)
  • Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) (deference for factual matters; strictness on legal standards)
  • Downer v. Aquamarine Operators, Inc., 701 S.W.2d 238 (Tex. 1985) (standard of review for appeals of trial court rulings)
  • Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (Sup. Ct. 1947) (private/public interest factors in forum non conveniens)
  • Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (Sup. Ct. 1981) (existence of adequate alternative forum; balancing factors)
  • Sarieddine v. Moussa, 820 S.W.2d 837 (Tex.App.—Dallas 1991) (availability/adequacy of alternative forum; Gulf Oil framework)
  • U.S. Lawns, Inc. v. Castillo, 347 S.W.3d 844 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 2011) (preserves ground-based review; harmless error for unchallenged grounds)
  • Oliphant Financial L.L.C. v. Hill, 310 S.W.3d 76 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2010) (need to challenge all independent grounds to uphold adverse ruling)
  • Fox v. Wardy, 224 S.W.3d 300 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2005) (reiteration of need to address grounds; oral grounds cannot substitute for written findings)
Read the full case