Texas House Bill HB1692

Texas 2015 - 84th Regular

Caption

Relating to the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

Impact

The bill represents a significant legal shift that favors local residents in tort actions. It reinforces the notion that Texas courts should prioritize claims brought by residents to prevent the stripping away of local judicial power by out-of-state entities. This could potentially lead to a fairer legal landscape for Texans bringing personal injury and wrongful death claims, as they will no longer be as vulnerable to being dismissed in favor of a more favorable jurisdiction for non-resident plaintiffs.

Summary

House Bill 1692 addresses the doctrine of forum non conveniens, which pertains to the ability of courts to dismiss or stay a plaintiff's claim based on the appropriateness of the chosen jurisdiction. The bill specifically amends sections of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code, stipulating that if at least one plaintiff in an action is a legal resident of Texas, the court cannot dismiss or stay that claim based solely on the presence of non-residents involved in the same case. This aims to provide additional protections to individuals residing in Texas against potential dismissals and to maintain a legal foothold within their home jurisdiction.

Sentiment

Sentiment around HB 1692 appears to be largely supportive among legislators, with its passage showing a strong majority in the House vote, reflecting a view that local interests should be safeguarded in legal proceedings. However, there may be concerns raised by some legal experts about the implications for non-resident plaintiffs who may not have as robust access to justice if their claims are tied to a jurisdiction in which they do not reside. The general feeling is that the bill enhances local plaintiff rights while balancing them against the rights of out-of-state claimants.

Contention

Notable points of contention may arise from debates surrounding equitable access to justice for all plaintiffs, regardless of residency. Critics may express concerns about how the changes to the forum non conveniens doctrine may affect the ability of courts to manage cases efficiently, particularly when these cases involve parties from multiple states. Additional discussions may center on the potential for increased legal disputes over jurisdictional matters in light of the new provisions set forth by the bill.