Guerra v. Selsdon Maritime Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Guerra v. Selsdon Maritime Corp.

711 So. 2d 1298, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5882, 1998 WL 263807

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 27, 1998

DocketNo. 96-2639

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 711 So. 2d 1298 (Guerra v. Selsdon Maritime Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Guerra v. Selsdon Maritime Corp., 711 So. 2d 1298, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5882, 1998 WL 263807 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The plaintiff below, a Chilean seaman, appeals from the dismissal under the forum non conveniens doctrine of an action against his employer for personal injuries allegedly sustained while their vessel was under repair in Virginia. Even if, as the appellant argues, the action is properly maintainable under the Jones Act on the principle adopted in Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 398 U.S. 306, 90 S.Ct. 1731, 26 L.Ed.2d 252 (1970) and Rojas v. Kloster Cruise, A/S, 550 So.2d 59 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), review denied, 562 So.2d 346 (1990), the trial court correctly concluded that forum non conveniens is applicable to such an action in the Florida state courts, In re Air Crash Disaster Near New Orleans, La., 821 F.2d 1147 (5th Cir.1987), vacated on other grounds, 490 U.S. 1032, 109 S.Ct. 1928, 104 L.Ed.2d 400 (1989); Armadora Naval Dominicana v. Garcia, 478 So.2d 873, 877 n. 6 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); but cf. Szumlicz v. Norwegian America Line, Inc., 698 F.2d 1192 (11th Cir.1983), and did not abuse its discretion in finding that dismissal was appropriate in this particular instance. Kinney Sys., Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co., 674 So.2d 86 (Fla.1996); Resorts Int'l Inc. v. Spinola, 70S So.2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Armadora, 478 So.2d at 873.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

The plaintiff below, a Chilean seaman, appeals from the dismissal under the forum non conveniens doctrine of an action against his employer for personal injuries allegedly sustained while their vessel was under repair in Virginia. Even if, as the appellant argues, the action is properly maintainable under the Jones Act on the principle adopted in Hellenic Lines Ltd. v. Rhoditis, 398 U.S. 306, 90 S.Ct. 1731, 26 L.Ed.2d 252 (1970) and Rojas v. Kloster Cruise, A/S, 550 So.2d 59 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), review denied, 562 So.2d 346 (1990), the trial court correctly concluded that forum non conveniens is applicable to such an action in the Florida state courts, In re Air Crash Disaster Near New Orleans, La., 821 F.2d 1147 (5th Cir.1987), vacated on other grounds, 490 U.S. 1032, 109 S.Ct. 1928, 104 L.Ed.2d 400 (1989); Armadora Naval Dominicana v. Garcia, 478 So.2d 873, 877 n. 6 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); but cf. Szumlicz v. Norwegian America Line, Inc., 698 F.2d 1192 (11th Cir.1983), and did not abuse its discretion in finding that dismissal was appropriate in this particular instance. Kinney Sys., Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co., 674 So.2d 86 (Fla.1996); Resorts Int'l Inc. v. Spinola, 70S So.2d 629 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Armadora, 478 So.2d at 873.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

711 So. 2d 1298, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 5882, 1998 WL 263807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guerra-v-selsdon-maritime-corp-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack