Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, Doing Business As Gilbert Storage & Transfer Co. (330 U.S. 501)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 10, 1947 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 330 U.S. 501 · 67 S. Ct. 839
- Docket
- No. 93
- Argued
- December 18, 1946
- Decided
- March 10, 1947
- Term
- October Term 1946
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority author
- Justice Jackson (R.H.)
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
How the Justices voted
- Majority
- Chief Justice Vinson, Justice R. H. Jackson (wrote), Justice Douglas, Justice Frankfurter, Justice Murphy
- Dissenting
- Justice Burton (wrote), Justice Reed (wrote), Justice Black (wrote), Justice Rutledge
Opinion excerpt
Mr. Justice Jackson delivered the opinion of the Court. The questions are whether the United States District Court has inherent power to dismiss a suit pursuant to the doctrine of jorum non conveniens and, if so, whether that power was abused in this case. The respondent-plaintiff brought this action in the Southern District of New York, but resides at Lynchburg, Virginia, where he operated a public warehouse. He alleges that the petitioner-defendant, in violation of the ordinances of Lynchburg, so carelessly handled a delivery of gasoline to his warehouse tanks and pumps as to cause an explosion and fire which consumed the warehouse building to his damage of 141,889.10, destroyed merchandise and fixtures to his damage of $3,602.40, caused injury to his business and profits of $20,038.27, and burned the property of customers in his custody under warehousing agreements to the extent of $300,000. He asks judgment of $365,529.77 with costs and disbursements, and interest from the date of the fire. The action clearly is one in tort. The petitioner-defendant is a corporation organized under the laws of Pennsylvania, qualified to do business in both Virginia and New York, and it has designated officials of each state as agents to receive service of process. When sued in New York, the defendant, invoking the doctrine of jorum non conveniens, claimed that the appropriate place for…
Excerpt of a 29,323-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.