Vivas v. Boeing Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that trial court properly afforded “some deference” to the plaintiffs’ chosen forum in Illinois, even though the plaintiffs were all Peruvian, and the airplane crash which allegedly caused the plaintiffs’ injuries occurred in Peru
• recognizing that trial court properly afforded “some deference” to the plaintiffs’ chosen forum in Illinois, even though the plaintiffs were all Peruvian, and the airplane crash which allegedly caused the plaintiffs’ injuries occurred in Peru
• holding that with respect to the convenience of the parties factor, the defendant, Boeing, could not contend that Cook County was an inconvenient forum since its corporate headquarters was in Chicago, even though the situs of the injury and all of the plaintiffs were in Peru
• noting that it was not an abuse of discretion to conclude that where “witnesses *** [are] scattered among different states and countries,” this factor did not tilt in favor of any one forum
• holding that with respect to the convenience of the parties factor, the defendant, Boeing, could not contend that Cook County was an inconvenient forum since its corporate headquarters was in Chicago, even though the situs of the injury and all of the plaintiffs were in Peru
• rejecting Boeing’s contention that Cook County was inconvenient where “defendant Boeing has its headquarters in plaintiffs’ chosen forum.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).