Rinauro v. Honda Motor Co.

California Court of Appeal Jan 11, 1995 No. B079773Published

Before: Woods (Fred)

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the action on forum non conveniens grounds, finding no abuse of discretion in the determination that Nevada was a more appropriate forum for the litigation.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing the action on forum non conveniens grounds.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We find no abuse of discretion and affirm the judgment of dismissal.”

“The granting or denial of such a motion is within the trial court’s discretion, and substantial deference is accorded its determination in this regard.”

“Under Stangvik v. Shiley Inc., supra, 54 Cal.3d 744, the trial court properly exercised its discretion in ruling that Nevada, not California, was the more convenient forum.”

Opinion

WOODS (Fred), J.

Applying

Stangvik,

Shiley Inc.

(1991) 54 Cal.3d 744 [1 Cal.Rptr.2d 556, 819 P.2d 14], the trial court dismissed the instant action on forum non conveniens grounds. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm the judgment of dismissal.

Background

Appellants (Frank Rinauro and his wife Jean) filed a tort complaint (negligence, strict liability, failure to warn, and loss of consortium) in a California court against two Japanese corporations (Honda Motor Co., Ltd. and Honda R & D Co., Ltd.) and two of their wholly owned subsidiaries, California corporations (American Honda Motor Co., Inc. and Honda R & D North America, Inc.). Defendants-respondents answered and thereafter

[509]

moved to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens. (Code Civ. Proc., § 410.30.)

After considering the moving papers (including seven prospective witnesses’ declarations) and oral argument the trial court granted the motion.

The lawsuit is based on an allegedly defective Honda Fourtrax 250, a four-wheel all-terrain vehicle, which tipped over while appellant (Frank Rinauro) was riding it and injured him.

Appellants reside in Nevada, bought the vehicle (used) in Nevada, and the accident occurred in Nevada.

Discussion

“Forum non conveniens is an equitable doctrine invoking the discretionary power of a court to decline to exercise the jurisdiction it has over a transitory cause of action when it believes that the action may be more appropriately and justly tried elsewhere.”

(Stangvik

Shiley Inc., supra,

54 Cal.3d 744, 751.)

Rinauro v. Honda Motor Co.

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief