Preview:

Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Opinion
JOSIP RADELJAK, Individually, as Personal Representative of the Estate of ENA BEGOVIC, Deceased, and as Next Friend of LANA RADELJAK; LEO RADELJAK; and TEREZA BEGOVIC, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORP, Defendant-Appellant. _______________________________ BEFORE THE ENTIRE BENCH PER CURIAM.

Chief Justice:

Justices:

Clifford W. Taylor

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman

FILED JULY 19, 2006

No. 127679

We granted leave to appeal to consider whether the Wayne Circuit Court abused its discretion in dismissing this case on the basis of the doctrine of forum non conveniens, where plaintiffs are residents and citizens of a foreign country and the lawsuit alleges product liability arising from a motor vehicle accident that occurred outside the United States. The Court of Appeals held that the circuit court abused its discretion in dismissing the case because Wayne County is not a "seriously inconvenient" forum. Because we conclude that the circuit court did

not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case, we reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and reinstate the circuit court's order dismissing the case. I. Facts Plaintiffs, who are residents and citizens of Croatia, were involved in a motor vehicle accident in Croatia. It is alleged that the Jeep Grand Cherokee in which they were seated somehow shifted from park into reverse and went off the roadway and into a ravine. One of the passengers died and the driver and other passengers were injured. The vehicle was designed and manufactured in

Michigan. The vehicle was purchased in Italy and maintained and serviced in Italy and Croatia. Plaintiffs argue that the transmission, designed and

manufactured in Japan, spontaneously slipped. Plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in the Wayne Circuit Court. Defendant moved for summary disposition on the basis of forum non conveniens. The circuit court granted the motion. Plaintiffs appealed and the Court of Appeals reversed.1 We granted defendant's application for leave to appeal and asked the parties to address: (1) whether the public interest factors of the forum non conveniens doctrine set forth in Cray v Gen Motors Corp, 389 Mich 382, 396 [207 NW2d 393] (1973), should be revised or modified; and (2) whether, even if another more appropriate forum exists, a Michigan court may not resist jurisdiction unless its own forum is

Unpublished opinion per curiam, issued December 14, 2004 (Docket No. 247781).

1

2


"seriously inconvenient." See Robey v Ford Motor Co, 155 Mich App 643, 645 (1986).[2] II. Standard of Review This Court reviews a trial court's decision to grant or deny a motion to dismiss a case on the basis of the doctrine of forum non conveniens for an abuse of discretion. Cray, supra at 397. An abuse of discretion occurs when the decision results in an outcome falling outside the principled range of outcomes. Herald Co v Eastern Michigan Univ Bd of Regents, __ Mich __; __ NW2d __ (Docket No. 128263 decided July 19, 2006); Novi v Robert Adell Children's Funded Trust, 473 Mich 242, 254; 701 NW2d 144 (2005). III. Analysis "Forum non conveniens" is defined as the "discretionary power of court to decline jurisdiction when convenience of parties and ends of justice would be better served if action were brought and tried in another forum." Black's Law Dictionary (6th ed). The doctrine is not derived from statutes; rather, it is a common-law doctrine created by courts.3 The United States Supreme Court

2 3

472 Mich 924 (2005). Const 1963, art 3,

Download JOSIP RADELJAK V DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORP.pdf

Michigan Law