Mark E. Gray


The doctrine of forum non conveniens is best understood as a means to “promote the ends of justice.” However, the doctrine’s modern application and its interaction with another doctrine, the doctrine of judgment enforcement, threatens foreign plaintiffs’ access to justice in transnational-litigation matters. This threat is most evident in what has been termed “boomerang litigation,” where foreign plaintiffs engage in a roundtrip courtroom excursion, from America to a foreign judiciary and then back to America for judgment enforcement. In the end, when the doctrine of forum non conveniens and the doctrine of judgment enforcement are at odds with each other, foreign plaintiffs end up empty handed while allegedly liable domestic defendants receive a windfall. This Note explores the problems presented by the modern application of the doctrine of forum non conveniens in the transnational litigation context and proposes a three-pronged, multifaceted approach to addressing these problems to preserve the “interest of justice.”