LA FONTAINE Et Al. v. SIGNATURE RESEARCH, INC.
342 Ga. App. 454
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- In May 2014, Michigan resident Francis La Fontaine was injured when a zipline collapsed while she was vacationing in the Dominican Republic; her husband joined as a plaintiff.
- Signature Research, Inc., a Georgia corporation, had inspected and certified the zipline in December 2013; the accident occurred about six months later.
- Plaintiffs first sued in federal court in the Southern District of Florida; that court dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds. Plaintiffs then sued Signature in Douglas County, Georgia.
- Signature moved to dismiss under OCGA § 9-10-31.1 (forum non conveniens), stipulating to submit to jurisdiction in the Dominican Republic and to waive statute-of-limitations defenses there (and in U.S. states where the claim otherwise would not be barred).
- The Georgia trial court granted dismissal after a factor-by-factor analysis under the statute; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether OCGA § 9-10-31.1 is unconstitutional as denying access to courts | La Fontaine: statute improperly limits access to Georgia courts and applies equally to out-of-state plaintiffs | Signature: statute validly codifies forum non conveniens and authorizes dismissal when another forum is more appropriate | Court: constitutional challenge not ruled below, so not reviewed; statute governs and dismissal allowed under its terms |
| Whether Sigala prevents dismissal in favor of a foreign country for U.S. citizens | La Fontaine: AT&T v. Sigala limits dismissal to nonresident aliens and foreign-accident plaintiffs, so dismissal here was improper | Signature: Sigala was superseded by OCGA § 9-10-31.1, which controls and permits dismissal to fora outside Georgia, including foreign countries | Court: Sigala superseded by the statute; dismissal in favor of foreign forum permitted |
| Whether the statute’s waiver requirement ("all other states of the United States") forbids dismissal to a foreign forum | La Fontaine: phrase limits dismissal to sister-state fora only | Signature: statutory language must be read in context; subsection (a) permits dismissal to any forum outside the state, including foreign countries | Court: language does not restrict dismissal to U.S. states; dismissal to Dominican Republic allowed |
| Whether trial court abused its discretion applying the seven § 9-10-31.1 factors | La Fontaine: factors (e.g., plaintiff’s Michigan medical witnesses) favor keeping the case in Georgia | Signature: accident site, witnesses, evidence, and inability to compel testimony favor dismissal to Dominican Republic | Court: trial court properly weighed factors (access to proof, compulsory process, premises viewing, administrative burdens) and did not abuse discretion; affirmed dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- AT&T Corp. v. Sigala, 274 Ga. 137 (Ga. 2001) (addressed forum non conveniens pre-codification)
- Wang v. Liu, 292 Ga. 568 (Ga. 2013) (standard of review: discretionary application of forum non conveniens)
- Hewett v. Raytheon Aircraft Co., 273 Ga. App. 242 (Ga. Ct. App. 2005) (discusses legislative intent behind codifying forum non conveniens)
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno, 454 U.S. 235 (U.S. 1981) (foreign-law and administrative-difficulty considerations in forum non conveniens analysis)
- Aldana v. Del Monte Fresh Produce N. A., Inc., 578 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2009) (dismissing U.S. plaintiff’s suit where witnesses and evidence were in Guatemala)
- Tazoe v. Airbus S.A.S., 631 F.3d 1321 (11th Cir. 2011) (forum non conveniens dismissal where inability to compel foreign witnesses and produce evidence favored dismissal)
- Hawthorn Suites Golf Resorts, LLC v. Feneck, 282 Ga. 554 (Ga. 2007) (Georgia trial court not abusing discretion in dismissing where witnesses located elsewhere)