Martinez v. E.i. Dupont De Nemours & Co.
2014 Del. LEXIS 79
| Del. | 2014Background
- Approximately 32 asbestos-exposure suits filed against DuPont by Argentine nationals alleging injuries from plants in Berazategui and Mercedes, Argentina, operated by DASRL (DuPont Argentina Sociedad Anomina).
- Plaintiff Martinez, wife of Rocha, alleges Rocha was injured while employed by DASRL; Superior Court dismissed for pleading defects, failure to join DASRL, and forum non conveniens; Court of Appeals affirmed only on forum non conveniens grounds.
- Superior Court held forum non conveniens dismissal appropriate due to Delaware forum burden and Argentina-specific issues; Court did not address other dismissal grounds on appeal.
- Court conducted Cryo-Maid factor analysis (ease of proof, witness process, premise view, application of Delaware law, pendency of similar actions abroad, other practical problems).
- Court emphasized novelty/importance of foreign-law issues and Argentina’s interest, concluding Delaware should defer to Argentine courts for Argentine-law questions; dismissal was proper without addressing Rule 19 issues.
- Majority noted prospective, non-retroactive guidance on Cryo-Maid and public-interest considerations under Taylor/related lines of Delaware forum non conveniens law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether forum non conveniens dismissal was proper | Martinez argues Delaware forum is appropriate for plaintiff’s claims. | DuPont argues Cryo-Maid factors show overwhelming hardship if litigated in Delaware. | Yes; dismissal upheld as overwhelmingly favored by Cryo-Maid factors. |
| Role of Cryo-Maid factors and “overwhelming hardship” standard | Factors weigh against dismissal; hardship not overwhelming. | Factors collectively demonstrate overwhelming hardship. | Overwhelming hardship standard applied appropriately; trial court within discretion. |
| Whether foreign-law issues justify dismissal | Argentine law questions should be adjudicated or certified in Argentina. | Novel foreign-law issues are adequately addressed through Cryo-Maid analysis. | Court may weigh foreign-law issues under Cryo-Maid; not error to rely on them for dismissal. |
| Whether plaintiff’s foreign-national status and foreign injury location reduce forum preference | Plaintiff’s non-Delaware residence should not drive forum choice. | Foreign-national interest supports applying Cryo-Maid to deter forum shopping. | Plaintiff’s foreign status and location weigh in favor of forum non conveniens outcome. |
| Effect of potential Rule 19 non-joinder issue on the ruling | Rule 19 concerns could negate dismissal? | Rule 19 separate issue; not reached on forum ruling. | Not addressed on this appeal since judgment affirmed on forum non conveniens grounds. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gen. Foods Corp. v. Cryo-Maid, Inc., 198 A.2d 681 (Del.1964) (Cryo-Maid factors govern forum non conveniens)
- Williams Gas Supply Co. v. Apache Corp., 594 A.2d 34 (Del.1991) (Cryo-Maid factor framework and deference to plaintiff’s forum choice)
- Taylor v. LSI Logic Corp., 689 A.2d 1196 (Del.1997) (Open foreign-law issues aren’t alone determinative; Cryo-Maid framework applies)
- Chrysler First Bus. Credit Corp. v. 1500 Locust Ltd. P'ship, 669 A.2d 104 (Del.1995) (Overwhelming hardship standard requires weight of factors, not just some)
- Ison v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 729 A.2d 832 (Del.1999) (Overwhelming hardship not preclusive; foreign-law considerations acknowledged)
- Parvin v. Kaufmann, 236 A.2d 425 (Del.1967) (Delaware forum non conveniens history; balancing factors)
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (1947) (Nonresident plaintiff forum choice respected unless balance strongly favors defendant)
- Martinez v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 82 A.3d 1 (Del.Super.2012) (Argentine law issues; hardship on DuPont; foreign-law impact on forum)