From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shaw v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jan 15, 1970
229 So. 2d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

Opinion

No. L-190.

December 16, 1969. Rehearing Denied January 15, 1970.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Duval County, Roger J. Waybright, J.

Horton Schwartz, and Green Hastings, Miami, for appellant.

Rogers, Towers, Bailey, Jones Gay, Jacksonville, for appellee.


Appellant John J. Shaw, plaintiff below, appeals from a final order of the trial court dismissing without prejudice this Federal Employer's Liability action on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

Plaintiff Shaw, a resident of North Carolina, alleged that he was injured on February 1, 1968, while an employee of appellee Railroad at Rocky Mount, North Carolina. Defendant Railroad is a Virginia corporation, having its principal place of business in Jacksonville, Florida. At the time he entered his order dismissing the instant cause, the trial judge did not have the benefit of this Court's recent decision in Adams v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company, 224 So.2d 797 (Fla.App.1st 1969), which is an "on all fours" case. Upon the authority of same, the judgment of dismissal by the trial judge in the instant cause is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

JOHNSON, C.J., CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Shaw v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jan 15, 1970
229 So. 2d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)
Case details for

Shaw v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co.

Case Details

Full title:JOHN J. SHAW, APPELLANT, v. SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, A…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Jan 15, 1970

Citations

229 So. 2d 275 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1970)

Citing Cases

Seaboard Coastline Railroad Co. v. Shaw

Certiorari denied without opinion. 229 So.2d 275.…

Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Swain

We have again considered that opinion in the light of the facts sub judice and have determined not to recede.…