State of West Virginia ex rel. American Electric Power Co., Inc. v. The Honorable David W. Nibert et al.

Summary

This document is a dissenting opinion by Justice Loughry in a West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals proceeding concerning a petition for a writ of prohibition and dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds. The dissent argues that Ohio was the more appropriate forum because the alleged exposure occurred in Ohio, most plaintiffs and potential witnesses were located there, and Ohio law would govern. It criticizes the circuit court and majority for relying on pre-statute forum non conveniens precedent and for inadequately applying the factors in West Virginia Code § 56-1-1a.

Holdings

1. West Virginia Code § 56-1-1a controls forum non conveniens motions after its enactment, and pre-statutory common-law precedent in Abbott was superseded.
2. The presence of a West Virginia plaintiff does not categorically preclude dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds.
3. Applying the statutory factors, Ohio was the clearly preferable forum because the alleged injury occurred there, most plaintiffs and many witnesses were there, Ohio law governed, and West Virginia had little localized interest in the dispute.

Questions Presented

1. Whether West Virginia Code § 56-1-1a, rather than pre-2007 common-law forum non conveniens precedent, controlled the motion to dismiss.
2. Whether the circuit court improperly relied on Abbott v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp. and confused general venue, jurisdiction, and joinder concepts with the statutory forum non conveniens inquiry.
3. Whether Ohio was the more appropriate forum under the statutory factors governing forum non conveniens.
4. Whether the presence of a West Virginia plaintiff barred dismissal on forum non conveniens grounds.

Disposition

writ_denied