Illinois Supreme Court Decision Could Curtail Ability of Asbestos Claimants to “Forum Shop” in Illinois
On December 28, 2012, the Illinois Supreme Court issued a decision that may have a wide-reaching impact on asbestos personal injury lawsuits filed in Illinois. In Fennell v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., 2012 IL 113812, the Court held that an asbestos personal injury case filed in St. Clair County, Illinois should have been dismissed by the trial under the forum non conveniens doctrine where the plaintiff was an out-of-state resident who had worked and been occupationally exposed to asbestos in other states. This decision should strengthen the ability of defendants sued in Illinois to invoke the forum non conveniens doctrine and move cases out of venues that have little or no connection with the claims that are being asserted.
The case began in 2009 when Walter Fennell filed suit against his former employer, Illinois Central Railroad, under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (“FELA”) for injuries he allegedly sustained as a result of asbestos exposure during the course of his employment. Although Fennell was a Mississippi resident and had primarily worked and been exposed to asbestos in Mississippi, he filed his FELA action in the circuit court of St. Clair County, Illinois. Illinois Central move to dismiss the action pursuant to the forum non conveniens doctrine, which the trial court denied. After a divided panel of the Fifth District of the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed, Illinois Central appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.
The Illinois Supreme Court engaged in a lengthy analysis of the various public and private interest factors to be considered for forum non conveniens motions. Importantly, the Court reiterated that a plaintiff’s choice of forum should be given less deference when the plaintiff is foreign to the chosen forum and the action giving rise to the litigation did not occur in the chosen forum.
Because Illinois had virtually no relevant or practical connection to Fennell’s FELA claim, the Court concluded that the private and public interest factors greatly favored a Mississippi forum. The Court held that the trial court had therefore abused its discretion in denying Illinois Central’s forum non conveniens motion and reversed the decisions of the trial and appellate courts. A copy of the Court’s full opinion is attached.
Fennell could go a long way in curtailing the “forum shopping” that has been particularly pervasive for asbestos personal injury claims in Illinois. Certain Illinois counties, such as Cook and Madison, are considered among the most plaintiff-friendly in the country and have long been preferred venues for asbestos personal injury claimants. Oftentimes these claimants have never resided or worked in Illinois, let alone the specific county where suit is filed.
Defendants have had little recourse when faced with such suits because trial courts would afford overwhelming deference to the plaintiff’s choice of forum and deny forum non conveniens motions almost as a matter of course. Fennell mandates a more serious application of the multi-factor test and requires Illinois trial courts to take a more proactive role in guarding against blatant forum shopping. The importance of Fennell is underscored by the fact that the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association, the Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel, and several corporations submitted amicus curiae briefs to the Illinois Supreme Court.
© TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP. ADVERTISING MATERIAL. These materials are to inform you of developments that may affect your business and are not to be considered legal advice, nor do they create a lawyer-client relationship. Information on previous case results does not guarantee a similar future result. Follow Troutman Sanders on Twitter.