Williams v. Seaboard Air Line R. Co.
Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Citation | 193 N.Y.S.2d 588,9 A.D.2d 268 |
Parties | Ernest L. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RAILROAD CO., Defendant-Appellant. |
Decision Date | 01 December 1959 |
William T. Sullivan, New York City, of counsel (Mark F. Hughes, New York City, with him on the brief; Willkie, Farr, Gallagher, Walton & FitzGibbon, New York City, attorneys), for appellant.
Martin Heller, New York City, of counsel (John M. Speyer, New York City, with him on the brief; Greenhill & Greenhill, New York City, attorneys), for respondent.
Before BOTEIN, J. P., and M. M. FRANK, VALENTE, McNALLY and STEVENS, JJ.
This is an appeal from an order denying the defendant's motion to vacate the service of a summons and complaint upon the ground of forum non conveniens.
The action is one to recover damages under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 51 et seq., and the Safety Appliance Act, 45 U.S.C.A. § 1 et seq. The accident occurred in Virginia. The plaintiff resides in Washington, D. C., and the defendant railroad, his employer, is a Virginia corporation. While the railroad has offices and transacts business in this state, its northern terminal appears to be in Virginia or in Washington, D. C. Beyond that point its trains operate on the tracks of other railroads. Most of the witnesses to the occurrence are nonresidents of New York and work principally in other jurisdictions.
Special Term held that our courts are without power to dismiss the action, and, therefore, the question of forum non conveniens is not reached. We must disagree. The Federal Employers' Liability Act (Sec. 6, 45 U.S.C. § 56) confers concurrent jurisdiction upon state and federal courts. The United State Supreme Court has ruled that 'Congress has exercised its authority over interstate commerce to the extent of permitting suits in state courts.' Miles v. Illinois Central R. Co., 315 U.S. 698, 702, 62 S.Ct. 827, 828, 86 L.Ed. 1129. Thus while as may take jurisdiction, there is a marked difference between a law which permits and one which compels state courts to do so in transitory actions. The question of compulsory acceptance of actions such as this was resolved in State of Missouri ex rel. Southern R. Co. v. Mayfield, 340 U.S. 1, at page 5, 71 S.Ct. 1, at page 3, 95 L.Ed. 3. In that case, Mr. Justice Frankfurter said:
In applying the concept of forum non conveniens, the courts of this state have manifested a reasonable willingness to permit nonresident suitors in transitory nontort actions to avail themselves of the opportunity to resolve their differences in our forum (see Bata v. Bata, 304 N.Y. 51, 105 N.E.2d 623; Wedemann v. United States Trust Co., 258 N.Y. 315, 179 N.E. 712, 79 A.L.R. 1320; Rothstein a. Rothstein, 272 App.Div. 26, 68 N.Y.S.2d 305, affirmed 297 N.Y. 705, 77 N.E.2d 13. However, the convenience of the court, not that of the litigants, and practical considerations are the essential ingredients for the acceptance or the rejection of actions not otherwise mandated. See Pietraroia v. New Jersey & H. R. R. & F. Co., 197 N.Y. 434, 439, 91 N.E. 120, 122; Gregonis v. Philadelphia & Reading Coal & Iron Co., 235 N.Y. 152, 160, 139 N.E. 223, 226, 32 A.L.R. 1; Murnan v. Wabash Ry. Co., 246 N.Y. 244, 158 N.E. 508, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Norfolk and Western Ry. Co. v. Tsapis, 19788
...L.Ed.2d 534 (1958); State ex rel. Southern Pac. Transp. Co. v. Frost, 102 N.M. 369, 695 P.2d 1318 (1985); Williams v. Seaboard Air Line R.R. Co., 9 A.D.2d 268, 193 N.Y.S.2d 588 (1959); Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. District Court, 298 P.2d 427 (Okla.), cert. denied, 352 U.S. 879, 7......
-
IN RE AIR CRASH DISASTER AT BOSTON, MASS., JULY 31, 1973, 160.
...See, e. g., Silver v. Great American Ins. Co., 29 N.Y.2d 356, 328 N.Y.S.2d 398, 278 N.E.2d 619 (1971); Williams v. Seaboard Airlines R. R. Co., 9 A.D. 268, 193 N.Y.S.2d 588 (1959). An unavoidable consequence of this ruling may well be forum-shopping by plaintiffs; however, this forum-shoppi......
-
Missouri Pacific R. Co. v. Tircuit, 89-IA-177
...State ex rel. Southern Pac. Transp. Co. v. Frost, 102 N.M. 369, 695 P.2d 1318 (1985). New York: Williams v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co., 9 A.D.2d 268, 193 N.Y.S.2d 588 (App.Div.1959). Oklahoma: Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. Co. v. District Ct., 298 P.2d 427 (Okla.), cert den., 352 U.S. 879, ......
-
Katz v. Liston
...to non-tort actions has been reiterated with citation on occasion, inter alia, of the Wittman case (Williams v. Seaboard Air Line R. R. Co., 9 A.D.2d 268, 269, 193 N.Y.S.2d 588, 590; Catapodis v. Onassis, 2 Misc.2d 234, 237, 151 N.Y.S.2d 39, 41). The restrictive rationale in the Wittman cas......