Lexplug logoLexplug

Ravelo Monegro v. Rosa

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
2000 Daily Journal DAR 4673, 211 F.3d 509, 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3455 (2000)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

While a foreign plaintiff's choice of forum is entitled to less deference than a domestic plaintiff's, a district court abuses its discretion by dismissing a case for forum non conveniens when the defendant's home forum has a substantial relation to the action and the defendant fails to demonstrate that trial in the chosen forum would be oppressive or vexatious.


Facts:

  • Thirteen aspiring baseball players from the Dominican Republic were recruited by Luis Rosa, a scout for the San Francisco Baseball Associates ('the Giants').
  • The players, aged sixteen to twenty, each signed a seven-year minor league contract with the Giants.
  • While the contracts initially assigned the players to a team in the Dominican Republic, they could be transferred to teams in the United States, which was the players' goal.
  • The players allege that Rosa conditioned their continued employment and potential transfer to the U.S. on their submission to his sexual advances.
  • The players also claim that Rosa misappropriated parts of their signing bonuses and earnings.
  • The players further allege that the Giants' management knew or had reason to know of Rosa's misconduct.

Procedural Posture:

  • In June 1997, the plaintiffs brought similar allegations before authorities in the Dominican Republic, resulting in a pending parallel civil and criminal suit.
  • In April 1998, the plaintiffs filed this suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California against the Giants, Rosa, and Hiatt.
  • The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the U.S. action based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens.
  • The district court granted the defendants' motion and dismissed the plaintiffs' complaint.
  • The plaintiffs (as appellants) timely appealed the dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Did the district court abuse its discretion by dismissing, on the grounds of forum non conveniens, a suit brought by foreign plaintiffs against a United States defendant in its home forum, where the action had a substantial connection to that forum?


Opinions:

Majority - Judge W. Fletcher

Yes, the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the case. A foreign plaintiff's choice of forum, while entitled to less deference under Piper Aircraft v. Reyno, is not entitled to zero deference. The court distinguished this case from Piper because the plaintiffs' chosen forum (Northern District of California) is not merely the defendant's home base but also has a substantial relation to the action, as the contracts with the San Francisco-based Giants created a legitimate expectation of playing in the United States. Furthermore, unlike in Piper, a key defendant (Rosa) might not be available in the alternative forum (the Dominican Republic), and the defendants failed to make a clear showing that access to proof would be easier there or that litigating in California would be oppressive and vexatious. The district court misapplied the standard by treating forum non conveniens as a tool to find the 'optimal' forum, rather than as an exceptional doctrine to be used sparingly.



Analysis:

This decision refines the application of the forum non conveniens doctrine established in Piper Aircraft. It clarifies that the 'less deference' standard for a foreign plaintiff's forum choice does not permit dismissal when the chosen U.S. forum has a significant connection to the underlying dispute. The ruling acts as a check on lower courts, preventing them from too readily dismissing cases involving foreign plaintiffs and reinforcing that the defendant bears the burden of proving that the chosen forum is genuinely oppressive. This strengthens the ability of foreign plaintiffs to hold U.S. corporations accountable in their home jurisdictions for actions connected to the U.S.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Ravelo Monegro v. Rosa (2000) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Ravelo Monegro v. Rosa