This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.
Facts
The case arose from the death of a skier at the Pajarito Ski Area in Los Alamos, New Mexico. The deceased, a resident of Los Alamos, lost control while skiing on a beginner's run and fatally struck a tree. The estate alleged that the ski run was intentionally made dangerously fast by the Los Alamos Ski Club for a videotaped race re-creation. Witnesses confirmed the hazardous condition of the ski run on the day of the accident (paras 1 and 3).
Procedural History
- Second Judicial District Court: The court granted the Los Alamos Ski Club's motion to transfer venue from Bernalillo County to Los Alamos County based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens, citing significant connections to Los Alamos County (para 2).
Parties' Submissions
- Petitioners (First Financial Trust Company and others): Argued that venue was proper in Bernalillo County, where First Financial has its principal place of business, and sought to quash the transfer of venue (paras 1-2, 4).
- Respondent (Los Alamos Ski Club): Asserted that the case should be transferred to Los Alamos County under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, emphasizing the stronger connection of the case to that county, including the location of the accident, witnesses, and parties involved (paras 2 and 7).
Legal Issues
- Does the doctrine of forum non conveniens apply to intrastate transfers of venue in New Mexico?
- Should the transfer of venue from Bernalillo County to Los Alamos County be quashed?
Disposition
- The Supreme Court of New Mexico held that the doctrine of forum non conveniens does not apply to intrastate venue transfers in New Mexico and quashed the transfer of venue (paras 2 and 21).
Reasons
Per Ransom J. (Franchini, Minzner, and McKinnon JJ. concurring):
The Court determined that the doctrine of forum non conveniens, as recognized in New Mexico, applies only to interstate cases and not to intrastate venue transfers. The Court overruled its prior decision in State ex rel. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. v. Frost, which had allowed intrastate application of the doctrine, finding no common law or statutory basis for such an application (paras 6, 10-17).
The Court emphasized that venue statutes reflect legislative policy, and the judiciary lacks authority to create a mechanism for intrastate venue transfers based on convenience. It noted that the legislature has not provided for such transfers in New Mexico, unlike other jurisdictions with specific statutory provisions (paras 11-12, 17).
The Court acknowledged potential forum shopping by plaintiffs but held that this is a consequence of the legislature's broad venue statute. Any remedy for this issue must come from legislative action, not judicial intervention (paras 18-19).
The Court concluded that technological advancements have reduced the inconvenience of litigating in different counties, further diminishing the need for an intrastate forum non conveniens doctrine (para 20).