Legal Opinion

Payne v. EIGHTH JUDICIAL DIST. COURT, ETC.

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided April 21, 1981No. 12975PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

Riker Laboratories, defendant below, filed a motion in the district court to dismiss petitioner’s complaint. The motion contended that under the doctrine of forum non conveniens the district court was not the proper forum for trial of the action in that all transactions giving rise to the lawsuit occurred in the state of Wyoming and all evidence and a significant number of witnesses remained in the state of Wyoming. The district court found the doctrine of forum non conveniens applicable to the litigation and dismissed the action. Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus compelling the…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Buckholt Ex Rel. Buckholt v. Second Judicial District Court of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Wilmurth v. First Judicial District CourtNevada Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Eaton v. Second Judicial District Court of the State of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1980

4Cited by7 opinions

  1. Pan v. Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada ex rel. County of ClarkNevada Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Chambers v. Merrell-Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Pan v. Dist. Ct.Nevada Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Dow Chemical Co. v. Castro AlfaroTexas Supreme Court · 1990
  5. Dow Chemical Co. v. Castro AlfaroTexas Supreme Court · 1990

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API