Courts apply the equitable doctrine of forum non conveniens when necessary to prevent the imposition of an inconvenient jurisdiction on a litigant. A trial court may, in its discretion, dismiss a case even when contacts between the defendant and the forum state exist that may confer personal jurisdiction upon the trial court, if the case itself has no significant connection to the forum.

A resident plaintiff’s forum choice deserves deference, all else being more or less equal, but that choice does not foreclose a defendant from demonstrating that the private and public interest factors favor dismissal when another forum’s interests predominate.

In Missouri, the equitable doctrine of forum non conveniens allows courts to dismiss a case if it determines that the forum is inconvenient for the parties involved, despite the existence of personal jurisdiction. This doctrine is applied to ensure fairness and practicality in litigation. While a Missouri resident plaintiff's choice of forum is generally given deference, this preference can be overridden if the defendant successfully shows that both private and public interest factors strongly favor litigation in a different forum. Private interest factors may include the location of evidence, the convenience of the parties, and access to witnesses, while public interest factors can encompass court congestion, the local interest in having localized controversies decided at home, and the familiarity of the forum with the law that needs to be applied. The court exercises discretion in balancing these factors and may dismiss a case if it finds that the connection to Missouri is not significant and another forum is more appropriate for resolving the dispute.