Esfeld v. Costa Crociere, S.P.A.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
289 F.3d 1300 (2002)
- Written by Elizabeth Yingling, JD
Facts
Three couples, residents of California and Washington (collectively, Esfeld) (plaintiffs) sued Costa Crociere, S.P.A. (Costa) (defendant), an Italian cruise line, for injuries Esfeld sustained during a land tour in Vietnam organized by Costa. Esfeld had received advertisements from Costa through American travel agents. Esfeld sued in a Florida district court. Costa filed a motion to dismissed for forum non conveniens. In deciding a forum non conveniens motion, Florida law considered the contacts a lawsuit had with the state. By contrast, federal courts considered the contacts a lawsuit had with the entirety of the United States. The district court granted the motion based on Florida law. In its ruling, the district court refused to apply Sibaja v. Dow Chemical Co., which held that federal forum non conveniens law, not state law, applied to diversity suits. The district court held that the ruling in Sibaja was primarily focused on the federal court’s power to police and control its own docket from a multitude of foreign lawsuits. The district court also held that the application of Florida law prevented forum shopping. According to the district court, because Florida’s forum non conveniens law was more restrictive than federal law, the concerns in Sibaja were not applicable. Esfeld appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Birch, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.