In Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. v Honeywell Intl. Inc ., Honeywell appealed the denial of its motion to dismiss the case on the grounds of "forum non conveniens" -- that New York County Supreme Court wasn't the appropriate forum for the dispute -- or to stay the matter pending resolution of a New Jersey lawsuit.
According to New York State law -- CPLR 327 -- a court may dismiss a case when, "in the interest of substantial justice," the dispute should be heard elsewhere.
The burden rests with the party challenging the "inconvenient" forum to show why the matter should be relocated. To that end, a court may consider a number of factors -- including whether the parties are non-residents and whether the transaction primarily occurred in another jurisdiction.
In this instance, Honeywell failed to show that litigating the dispute in New Jersey would serve the interests of "substantial justice." In fact, the record demonstrated that there was a significant "nexus" -- or connection -- with New York since that was where the insurance policies in question had been negotiated and brokered. And, since New York courts are capable of applying New Jersey law, both the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division, First Department, were of the opinion there was little need to grant Honeywell 's request to dismiss.
We're guessing Honeywell didn't find that decision good or sweet.
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. v Honeywell Intl. Inc .