Hahn

Hahn v. Diaz-Barba

Good Law
125 Cal. Rptr. 3d 242·194 Cal. App. 4th 1177·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 509
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 29, 2011No. D056528California7,784 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McConnell, J.

The issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred under the forum non conveniens doctrine by staying an action against residents of California for tortious interference with contract and other business torts for the sale of an interest in a Mexican business. Plaintiffs contend defendants did not meet their burden of proving Mexico is a suitable alternative forum, or that on balance the private and public interests favor Mexico as the more convenient forum. We affirm the order.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Parties

Plaintiffs are Wolfgang Hahn and Nikita U, S.A. (Nikita). Hahn is a German citizen who resides in Switzerland and Mexico. He owns Nikita, a Luxembourg corporation, which is the majority owner of Impulsora de Chamela, SA de CV (Impulsora), a Mexican company with property in Chamela, State of Jalisco, Mexico. Hahn intended to develop the property into an exclusive resort called La Tambora.

Defendants are Alejandro Diaz-Barba (Diaz); his mother, Martha Barba De La Torre (Barba); and their friends, brothers Michael Kocherga, Nicholas Kocherga and Alexander Kocherga (collectively, the Kochergas). Diaz and Barba are Mexican citizens who reside in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.