Supreme Court

23-0777 - In re Pinnergy Ltd. 

In re Pinnergy Ltd.

  • Case number: 23-0202
  • Legal category: Procedure-Pretrial
  • Subtype: Forum Non Conveniens
  • Set for oral argument: October 30, 2024

Case Summary

The issue in this case is whether the trial court erred by denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss for forum non conveniens.

A Union Pacific train collided with Pinnergy’s 18-wheeler truck (driven by Ladonta Sweatt) in northwest Louisiana. Thomas Richards and Hunter Sinyard were conductors on Union Pacific’s train. Pinnergy filed suit in Red River Parish, Louisiana, seeking damages from the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Union Pacific. Three months later, Richards filed suit in Harris County, Texas against Pinnergy, Union Pacific, and Sweatt. Sinyard intervened in the Harris County suit as a plaintiff.

The Harris County defendants filed a motion to dismiss that suit for forum non conveniens. They pointed out that the accident occurred 240 miles from the Harris County courthouse, but only 18 miles from the Louisiana courthouse; that the plaintiffs live closer to Red River Parish than to Harris County; and the existence of litigation in Louisiana arising from the same collision. The trial court denied the motion without explanation. The court of appeals denied the defendants’ mandamus petition without substantive opinion.

The defendants filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the Supreme Court, arguing that all six statutory forum non conveniens factors have been met. The Court set the petition for oral argument.

 

Case summaries are created by the Court's staff attorneys and law clerks and do not constitute the Court’s official descriptions or statements. Readers are encouraged to review the Court’s official opinions for specifics regarding each case. Links to the full case documents are included above.