Summary
The Illinois Appellate Court, Fourth District, reviewed the dismissal of plaintiffs' contract-related claims on forum non conveniens grounds in favor of Rockland County, New York. The court held that defendants' motion was untimely under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 187(a) and that defendants failed to establish good cause for an extension under Rule 183. The court reversed the dismissal and remanded for further proceedings.
Holdings
- A forum non conveniens motion must be filed no later than 90 days after the last day allowed for the moving party's answer. Defendants' motion, filed more than a year after the July 30, 2018, answer deadline, was untimely.
- The circuit court abused its discretion by extending the Rule 187(a) deadline because defendants failed to establish good cause for their delay.
- Because the motion was untimely and defendants did not establish good cause for an extension, the circuit court erred by considering and granting the motion to dismiss.
Questions Presented
- Whether defendants' September 3, 2019, forum non conveniens motion was timely under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 187(a).
- Whether the circuit court properly extended Rule 187(a)'s 90-day filing deadline under Illinois Supreme Court Rule 183 for good cause.
- Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by considering and granting the forum non conveniens motion.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (10)
- Langenhorst v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co., 219 Ill. 2d 430, 441, 848 N.E.2d 927, 934 (2006)(followed)
- Fennell v. Illinois Central R.R. Co., 2012 IL 113812, ¶ 12, 987 N.E.2d 355(followed)
- Miller v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 173 Ill. 2d 252, 259-60, 671 N.E.2d 39, 43-44 (1996)(followed)
- Ferris, Thompson & Zweig, Ltd. v. Esposito, 2017 IL 121297, ¶ 22, 90 N.E.3d 400(followed)
- Vision Point of Sale, Inc. v. Haas, 226 Ill. 2d 334, 347-54, 875 N.E.2d 1065 (2007)(followed)
- Ellis v. AAR Parts Trading, Inc., 357 Ill. App. 3d 723, 738, 828 N.E.2d 726, 739 (2005)(followed)
- In re Marriage of Clark, 232 Ill. App. 3d 342, 597 N.E.2d 240 (1992)(distinguished)
- Eads v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 365 Ill. App. 3d 19, 29, 847 N.E.2d 601, 611 (2006)(distinguished)
- Chochorowski v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 376 Ill. App. 3d 167, 171-72, 875 N.E.2d 682, 687 (2007)(distinguished)
- Bell v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 106 Ill. 2d 135, 146, 478 N.E.2d 384, 389 (1985)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…