John A. Schexnider v. McDermott International, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “there is ordinarily a strong presumption in favor of the plaintiff’s choice of forum that may be overcome only when the private and public interest factors clearly point towards trial in the alternative forum”
• stating that “there is ordinarily a strong presumption in favor of the plaintiff’s choice of forum that may be overcome only when the private and public interest factors clearly point towards trial in the alternative forum”
• stating that “there is ordinarily a strong presumption in favor of the plaintiff’s choice of forum that may be overcome only when the private and public interest factors clearly point towards trial in the alternative forum”
• affirming district court’s determination that Lauritzen dictated applicability of Australian law but requiring that district court retain jurisdiction and try the case
• declining to transfer the case because, among other factors, plaintiff, an American seaman in poor health, would be greatly inconvenienced by suit in Australia, and therefore the United States constituted the proper forum
• “First the court determines that United States law does not apply, and then the court balances public and private convenience factors set forth in judicial precedent to determine whether to dismiss the case [on grounds of forum non conveniens]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).