Corinthian Colleges vs. Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company # 4D05-2200

Corinthian Colleges Inc . vs . Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Co

No . 4D05-220 March 22 , 2006

Facts

This is an appeal by Corinthian Colleges Inc . when the trial court denied the college 's request to dismiss the complaint based on forum non conveniens . The insurance company d a complaint in Broward County seeking declaratory relief . Corinthian Colleges on the other hand moved to have the complaint dismissed based on forum non conveniens . The legal framework that the court has to analyze is the federal standard adopted by the Florida Supreme Court in Kinney System

Inc . v Continental Insurance Co , 674 So . 2d 86 (Fla . 1996

Procedural Background

Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company d a complaint in Broward Cournty seeking declaratory relief . Corinthian Colleges on the other hand moved to have the complaint dismissed based on forum non conveniens . The trial court denied Corinthian 's request , thus an appeal ensued

Issues

a . Whether or not the Trial Court 's decision committed abuse of discretion in reviewing the complaint . b . Whether or not the choice of forum is not an inconvenient one

Holding

a . Broad Holding . After reviewing the facts of the case under applicable legal analysis , this court concludes that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the college 's motion

b . Narrow Holding . In review of the Kinney Case , there are four steps of analysis : 1 ) the court must establish whether an alternative forum exists which possesses jurisdiction over the whole case 2 ) the trial judge must consider all relevant factors of private interest , weighing in the balance a strong presumption against disturbing plaintiff 's initial forum choice 3 ) if the trial judge finds this balance of private interests in equipoise or near equipoise , he then must determine whether or not factors of public interest tip the balance of in favour of a trial in another forum 4 ) if he decides that the balance favors such a forum , the he must ensure that plaintiffs can reinstate their suit in the alternative forum without undue inconvenience or prejudice

Rationale

After determining that the fundamental issues involves a legal question not involving the need for many witnesses or other practical problems regarding obtaining evidence in this forum , it is concluded that neither party would be significantly favoured or biased by one forum over another . Courts can protect their dockets from cases over which they may be able to assert jurisdiction but which lack significant connection in the forum , and courts can legitimately encourage the litigation of controversies in the localities which they arose . Lastly , courts may validly consider its familiarity with the law which will have to be applied in considering whether to retain jurisdiction over a case

Concurring /Dissenting

Klein agrees with opinion of the majority except that it has not addressed one of the colleges ' main arguments that the trial court erred in applying the presumption favoring the plaintiff 's choice of forum . Klein believes that the trial court properly applied the presumption in favour of the insurer 's choice of...