Urquhart v. Simmons
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
CHASANOW, Judge.
We are called upon in this case to determine the scope of a trial court’s authority to transfer a case based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens as codified in Maryland Rule 2-327(c). For the reasons discussed below, we hold that a trial court may not sua sponte transfer a case on the grounds of forum non conveniens. Nevertheless, because the defendants in the instant case adequately raised that issue by filing their motion to dismiss or to transfer, we hold that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in transferring this case to Montgomery County.
I
This appeal arises…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. ReynoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Stewart Organization, Inc. v. Ricoh Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Hartford Insurance v. Manor Inn of Bethesda, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1994
- Goins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
- Odenton Development Company v. LamyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Owens Corning v. WalatkaCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1999
- Government Employees Ins. Co. v. BurnsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996
- Jones v. Prince George's CountyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
- Leung v. NunesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
- Thompson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2010
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.