SHIRLEY SMITH AND AMANDA HUDSON INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ANTHONY RAY SMITH DECEASED v. FDF ENERGY SERVICES LLC AND WAYNE GRIFFITH (2024)

In this case, the trial court first granted the defendants’ motion to transfer for forum non conveniens pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure article 123. Thereafter, and rather than seeking supervisory review of that ruling, plaintiffs filed a “Motion for New Trial to Reconsider Forum Non Conveniens Ruling” in the trial court, which that court granted, reversing its original decision to transfer the case. In their writ application, defendants argue that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to make its second ruling and it was therefore void. La. C.C.P. art. 3. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, assert that the first trial court ruling on forum non conveniens was interlocutory and therefore could be reviewed by the trial court at any time prior to final judgment, including in a venue transfer scenario. I would grant the writ to examine these conflicting arguments and determine whether the trial court retained jurisdiction over the matter at the time of its second ruling.

Crichton, J., would grant and assigns reasons.