FORUM NON CONVENIENS
forum non conveniens (for-<<schwa>>m non k<<schwa>>n-vee-nee-enz). [Latin “an
unsuitable court”] Civil procedure. The doctrine that an appropriate forum — even though
competent under the law — may divest itself of jurisdiction if, for the convenience of the litigants
and the witnesses, it appears that the action should proceed in another forum in which the action
might also have been properly brought in the first place. — Also termed forum inconveniens.
[Cases: Courts 28; Federal Courts 45. C.J.S. Courts §§ 68–69.]
“Forum non conveniens allows a court to exercise its discretion to avoid the oppression or
vexation that might result from automatically honoring plaintiff’s forum choice. However,
dismissal on the basis of forum non conveniens also requires that there be an alternative forum in
which the suit can be prosecuted. It must appear that jurisdiction over all parties can be secured
and that complete relief can be obtained in the supposedly more convenient court. Further, in at
least some states, it has been held that the doctrine cannot be successfully invoked when the
plaintiff is resident of the forum state since, effectively, one of the functions of the state courts is
to provide a tribunal in which their residents can obtain an adjudication of their grievances. But in
most instances a balancing of the convenience to all the parties will be considered and no one
factor will preclude a forum non coveniens dismissal, as long as another forum is available.” Jack
- Friedenthal et al., Civil Procedure §§ 2.17, at 87–88 (2d ed. 1993).[Blacks Law 8th]