Opinion ID: 78293
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Availability and Adequacy of the Italian Forum

Text: The defendant bears the burden of demonstrating an adequate alternative forum is available. Availability and adequacy warrant separate consideration. Leon, 251 F.3d at 1311. Ordinarily, an alternative forum is available when the defendant is `amenable to process' in the other jurisdiction. Piper, 454 U.S. at 255 n. 22, 102 S.Ct. at 265 n. 22 (citation omitted). An alternative forum is adequate if it provides for litigation of the subject matter of the dispute and potentially offers redress for plaintiffs' injuries. See id. An adequate forum need not be a perfect forum, but it must provide a satisfactory remedy. Satz v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 244 F.3d 1279, 1283 (11th Cir.2001). In this case, Italy is an available forum because Cessna is willing to submit to jurisdiction and is amenable to process there. In declaring Italy an adequate forum, the district court noted Italian courts have addressed similar cases and awarded satisfactory remedies. Both parties agree Italian law provides the rule of decision regardless of whether the claims are litigated in Milan or Miami. Although they disagree over whether Cessna will be found liable to the European Plaintiffs under Italian law, Italian tort law provides the plaintiffs with comparable remedies for their injuries. See, e.g., Membreno v. Costa Crociere S.p.A., 425 F.3d 932, 937 (11th Cir.2005) (recognizing Italy as an adequate forum for tort claims). For these reasons, we find the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding Italy was an adequate alternative forum for the European Plaintiffs' claims.