[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
AUGUST 28, 2007
No. 07-11183 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 06-60700-CV-FAM
NORA SUE TINGLE,
an individual,
JAMES MICHAEL TINGLE,
an individual,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
versus
WALTER LEE BANKS,
an individual,
LAGO MAR REALTY, INC.,
a Florida corporation,
COCOS DEL PARAISO SA,
a foreign corporation,
Defendants-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(August 28, 2007)
Before BIRCH, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Plaintiffs Nora and Michael Tingle appeal the district court order dismissing
their case on forum non conveniens grounds. This case arises out of an injury to
Nora Tingle which occurred when she fell from a cliff while on vacation in Costa
Rica. The Tingles allege that the vacation was arranged by Walter Lee Banks as
an agent for Lago Mar Realty and the injury occurred on land owned by Cocos Del
Paraiso SA. We review a dismissal on these grounds for an abuse of discretion.
SME Racks, Inc. v. Sistemas Mecanicos Para Electronica, S.A., 382 F.3d 1097,
1100 (11th Cir. 2004). Under this standard, a district court’s decision deserves
deference where it has considered all relevant public and private interest factors
and its balancing is reasonable. Id.
Here we can find no abuse of discretion because the district court considered
all the relevant factors including the presumption in favor of the plaintiff’s choice
of forum in making its determination. The moving party has the burden to
“demonstrate that (1) an adequate alternative forum is available, (2) the public and
private factors weigh in favor of dismissal, and (3) the plaintiff can reinstate his
suit in the alternative forum without undue inconvenience or prejudice.” Leon v.
Million Air, Inc., 251 F.3d 1305, 1311 (11th Cir. 2001). Costa Rica provides an
2
adequate forum and the Tingles can reinstate their lawsuit there without prejudice,
given that the defendants have agreed to submit to the court’s jurisdiction and the
defendants are amenable to process there. See Leon, 251 F.3d at 1311.
Furthermore, the district court engaged in a reasonable analysis of the public and
private interests involved, and applied the presumption in favor of the plaintiff’s
choice of forum. Therefore, we affirm the district court's order dismissing this
action for forum non conveniens.
AFFIRMED.
3