Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp.

62 Citing cases

  1. Alcoa S.S. Co. v. M/V Nordic Regent

    654 F.2d 147 (2d Cir. 1978)   Cited 176 times
    In Alcoa the second circuit said of its decision in Farmanfarmaian: "We concluded that American citizenship alone is not a barrier to dismissal on the ground of forum non conveniens and that Gilbert still provides the controlling standard."

    The essential question presented is what is the proper standard for determining a motion to dismiss an admiralty action on the ground of forum non conveniens when the action has been brought by an American resident libelant in a United States district court and when there is an alternative forum abroad. For the reasons below, we hold that the proper standard is that set forth by the Supreme Court in Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (1947), and recently adhered to by our Court in Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 588 F.2d 880 (2 Cir. 1978). The district court properly applied that standard in the instant case.

  2. Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno

    454 U.S. 235 (1981)   Cited 4,845 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Referencing Gulf Oil, 330 U.S. at 509, 67 S.Ct. 839

    In other cases, dismissals have been affirmed despite the failure to provide detailed affidavits. See Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 437 F. Supp. 910, 924 (SDNY 1977), aff'd., 588 F.2d 880 (CA2 1978). And in a decision handed down two weeks after the decision in this case, another Third Circuit panel affirmed a dismissal without mentioning such a requirement.

  3. Panama Processes, S.A. v. Cities Serv. Co.

    650 F.2d 408 (2d Cir. 1981)   Cited 24 times
    Upholding the dismissal of a suit on the basis of forum non conveniens when the district court considered among other factors "the fact . . . that a New York jury would be confronted with 14 years of corporate `sonnets from the Portuguese' requiring translation"

    The District Court's Decision In a thorough opinion, reported at 500 F.Supp. 787, the district court reviewed the pertinent principles set forth in the leading forum non conveniens cases, including Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 67 S.Ct. 839, 91 L.Ed. 1055 (1947) ("Gilbert"); Alcoa Steamship Company v. M/V Nordic Regent, 654 F.2d 147 (2d Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 101 S.Ct. 248, 66 L.Ed.2d 116 (1980) ("Alcoa"); Schertenleib v. Traum, 589 F.2d 1156 (2d Cir. 1978) ("Schertenleib"); and Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 588 F.2d 880 (2d Cir. 1978) ("Farmanfarmaian"). As set forth in greater detail below, the court evaluated the prospects of the parties for a fair adjudication of the claims in the alternative forums, as well as such "public interest" factors as the remoteness of the forum from the center of the controversy, and the ease or difficulty of judicial enforcement of an eventual judgment, and concluded that New York is not, and Brazil is, an appropriate forum for this action.

  4. Varnelo v. Eastwind Transport

    02 Civ. 2084 (KMW)(AJP) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 3, 2003)   Cited 43 times
    Finding plaintiffs clearly engaged in forum shopping where plaintiffs admitted their recovery would be much greater in a New York court and the case had little connection to the United States

    Indeed, in the related context of the adequacy of the foreign forum (discussed further in Point IV below), the Second Circuit has held that "[o]nce defendants consent to suit in" the foreign forum, "there [is] no reason to determine whether defendants were initially subject to the compulsory jurisdiction of [the foreign forum]." Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 588 F.2d 880, 882 (2d Cir. 1978) (citing Schertenleib v. Traum, 589 F.2d at 1163) ("Plaintiff argues that this practice is unfair to him in that he first brought suit in allegedly the only place he could, and now, after he tries to sue defendant in Geneva, he may end up back here again, all at his inconvenience and expense. The answer to this is that a district court should not dismiss unless it justifiably believes that the alternative forum will take jurisdiction, if the defendant consents.

  5. Pollux Holding Ltd. v. Chase Manhattan Bank

    329 F.3d 64 (2d Cir. 2003)   Cited 247 times
    Holding that "a plaintiff's choice of forum [does not] deserve[] presumptive deference simply because the chosen forum is defendant's home forum"

    The treaty stops well short of granting the nationals of both countries "access to each country's courts on terms no less favorable than those applicable to nationals of the court's country." See Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 588 F.2d 880, 882 (2d Cir. 1978). As we have noted before, "[h]istory and practice . . . teach that a principle of equal access must be explicitly adopted."

  6. Inversiones Eufrates, S.A. v. Banco Industrial de Venezuela, S.A. (In re Blanco)

    997 F.2d 974 (2d Cir. 1993)   Cited 200 times
    Holding that forum-selection clause was permissive where parties "irrevocably submit[ted]" to the jurisdiction of a designated forum

    We have ruled, however, that when a treaty with a foreign nation accords its nationals access to our courts equivalent to that provided American citizens, identical forum non conveniens standards must be applied to such nationals by American courts. See Irish Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Aer Lingus Teoranta, 739 F.2d 90, 91-92 (2d Cir. 1984); Alcoa S.S. Co. v. M/V Nordic Regent, 654 F.2d 147, 152-53 (2d Cir.) (in banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 890, 101 S.Ct. 248, 66 L.Ed.2d 116 (1980); Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 588 F.2d 880, 882 (2d Cir. 1978). Because such a treaty exists between the United States and Venezuela, see Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Navigation and Commerce, Jan. 20, 1836, U.S.-Venez., art. 13, 8 Stat. 466, 472, no discount may be imposed upon the plaintiff's initial choice of a New York forum in this case solely because Proyecfin is a foreign corporation.

  7. Calavo Growers of California v. Belgium

    632 F.2d 963 (2d Cir. 1980)   Cited 155 times
    Holding the likelihood that foreign law would govern "lends weight to the conclusion that the suit should be prosecuted in that jurisdiction"

    However, while not all of us might have decided this issue as did the court below, we recognize that a district judge has "wide discretion" in determining the issue of forum non conveniens. See Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501, 508, 67 S.Ct. 839, 843, 91 L.Ed. 1055 (1947); Alcoa Steamship Co. v. M/V Nordic Regent, 636 F.2d 860 at 871 (2d Cir. 1980) (in banc); Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp. 588 F.2d 880, 882 (2d Cir. 1978). Even on the assumption that the district court had jurisdiction over all eighteen defendants, we believe that the district court's dismissal of this action on the ground of forum non conveniens was not a clear abuse of discretion.

  8. Reyno v. Piper Aircraft Co.

    630 F.2d 149 (3d Cir. 1980)   Cited 119 times
    Holding that when there has been an interstate transfer without personal jurisdiction, the transferor state's choice of law does not apply to that defendant

    American citizenship of the plaintiff does not increase the defendant's burden, just as foreign citizenship may not lessen it.Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 437 F. Supp. 910, 927 (S.D.N.Y. 1977), aff'd on other grounds, 588 F.2d 880 (2d Cir. 1978).See Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 588 F.2d 880, 882 (2d Cir. 1978).

  9. Murty v. Aga Khan

    92 F.R.D. 478 (E.D.N.Y. 1981)   Cited 7 times
    Sending case involving a New York resident plaintiff to France, the defendant's domicile

    I Moore's Federal Practice, P 0.145(5), pp. 1619-20. In one recent second circuit case, Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 437 F.Supp. 910 (S.D.N.Y.1977), aff'd, 588 F.2d 880 (2d Cir. 1978), for example, a judge's exercise of discretion in dismissing a case with a fact pattern similar to the one now before us was approved: Since these agreements were reached in Iran, between Iranian parties and concerning the shares of an Iranian manufacturer ... it is clear that evidence of the breach itself ... must come primarily from Iran, and the major witnesses whose testimony may be needed concerning this breach will also most likely come from there.

  10. Panama Processes, S.A. v. Cities Service Co.

    500 F. Supp. 787 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)   Cited 17 times

    Preliminarily it must be noted that, under present Second Circuit authority, the American citizenship of a plaintiff has no particular effect in balancing the forum non conveniens factors. In Farmanfarmaian v. Gulf Oil Corp., 588 F.2d 880 (2d Cir. 1978), the Iranian plaintiff had the advantage of a treaty in the United States and Iran which granted him access to American courts "on terms no less favorable than those applicable to nationals of the court's country." Thus, as the Alcoa en banc court observed of Farmanfarmaian: