Lamoutte v. Paneque

Full title: Cecille LAMOUTTE, Appellant, v. Agueybana Ruiz PANEQUE, Appellee.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Date published: Nov 23, 2022

351 So. 3d 210 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2022)

Opinion

No. 3D22-540

11-23-2022

Cecille LAMOUTTE, Appellant, v. Agueybana Ruiz PANEQUE, Appellee.

AV Professional Association, and Alba Varela, Miami, for appellant. Law Offices of Diane M. Trainor, and Diane M. Trainor, Miami, and Devon M. Quijano, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AV Professional Association, and Alba Varela, Miami, for appellant.

Law Offices of Diane M. Trainor, and Diane M. Trainor, Miami, and Devon M. Quijano, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and EMAS and SCALES, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See DeStefanis v. Tan, 231 So. 3d 537, 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) ("An order denying a motion to dismiss based on forum non conveniens is reviewed for an abuse of discretion."); Eggers v. Eggers, 776 So. 2d 1096, 1098 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) ("Under the forum non conveniens statute, a plaintiff's forum selection is presumptively correct and the burden is on the defendant to show either substantial inconvenience or that undue expense requires change for the convenience of the parties or witnesses. This court has instructed that when a forum non conveniens challenge is raised, it is incumbent upon the parties to submit affidavits or other evidence that will shed necessary light on the issue of the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interest of justice.") (citations omitted).