Littleton v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co., 2013 Va. Cir. LEXIS 92

Plaintiff Gale Littleton, a retired railroad engineer, worked for the Railroads from 1969 to 2011 and retired from Norfolk Southern.
Plaintiff alleges exposure to asbestos and diesel exhaust in locomotive cab environments caused lung cancer diagnosed in Feb. 2013.
Plaintiff contends Railroads violated FELA and the Locomotive Inspection Act, claiming unsafe crew cabs with asbestos and diesel fumes.
Defendants Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Consolidated Rail Corporation, and American Premier Underwriters filed a Verified Objection to Venue and Motion to Dismiss under Virginia § 8.01-265(i) in Aug. 2013.
The court denied the Motion to Dismiss, finding no good cause to dismiss for forum non conveniens and determining Norfolk, VA, is an appropriate forum given witness nexus and plaintiff’s choice of forum.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether dismissal for forum non conveniens is warranted	Littleton argues for dismissal to Ohio/Pennsylvania or Florida as more convenient	Railroads contend Norfolk is inconvenient and transfer to another forum is appropriate	No good cause; action retained in Norfolk
Role of Williams in §8.01-265(i) analysis	Argues Williams applies only to transfer, not dismissal	Williams governs substantial inconvenience and nexus for both dismissal and transfer	Williams governs good cause nexus; Norfolk retains as appropriate
Presumption in favor of plaintiff's chosen forum	Forum in which plaintiff resides and witnesses are located should prevail	Need to overcome presumption due to witness inconvenience and nexus	Presumption upheld; Norfolk forum favored given nexus and witnesses

Norfolk & W. Ry. v. Williams, 239 Va. 389 (Va. 1990) (defines good cause and substantial inconvenience in forum non conveniens contexts)
Virginia Elec. & Power Co. v. Dungee, 258 Va. 235 (Va. 1999) (evaluates nexus and forum choice considerations)