(a) When the court finds that in the interest of substantial justice the action should be heard in another forum, the court, on the motion of any party, may stay or dismiss the action in whole or in part on any conditions that may be just. The domicile or residence in this state of any party to the action shall not preclude the court from staying or dismissing the action.
R 327.Inconvenient forum.
Article 3. Jurisdiction and Service, Appearance and Choice of Court · Last amended 1984 · Last verified July 21, 2026
In one sentenceCPLR 327 lets a court stay or dismiss an action, in the interest of substantial justice, when it should be heard in another forum, though it can't do so for contracts covered by General Obligations Law 5-1402 where the parties chose New York law.
Full Text of CPLR 327
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (a) of this rule, the court shall not stay or dismiss any action on the ground of inconvenient forum, where the action arises out of or relates to a contract, agreement or undertaking to which section 5-1402 of the general obligations law applies, and the parties to the contract have agreed that the law of this state shall govern their rights or duties in whole or in part.
Plain-English Summary
CPLR 327 is New York's forum non conveniens rule. On a party's motion, a court can stay or dismiss an action, on whatever conditions are just, when it decides that substantial justice calls for the case to be heard somewhere else. The domicile or residence of a party in New York doesn't stop the court from staying or dismissing the case on this ground; residence alone doesn't guarantee a New York forum.
Subdivision (b) carves out a significant exception. When an action arises from a contract, agreement, or undertaking that falls under General Obligations Law 5-1402, and the parties agreed that New York law would govern their rights or duties, the court can't dismiss on inconvenient-forum grounds at all. That carve-out protects the predictability of a New York choice-of-law clause in the kinds of substantial commercial contracts the General Obligations Law provision covers.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is forum non conveniens under New York law?
CPLR 327(a) lets a court stay or dismiss an action, on just terms, when it finds that substantial justice requires the case to be heard in another forum.
Does living in New York protect a case from being dismissed for inconvenient forum?
No. The statute says a party's domicile or residence in New York doesn't preclude the court from staying or dismissing the action on this ground.
Is there an exception for contracts that choose New York law to govern?
Yes. Under CPLR 327(b), a court can't dismiss for inconvenient forum when the action arises from a contract covered by General Obligations Law 5-1402 and the parties agreed New York law would govern.
Who can ask a court to dismiss on inconvenient-forum grounds?
Any party to the action, by motion.
Can the court attach conditions to a forum non conveniens dismissal?
Yes, the court may impose whatever conditions it finds just when staying or dismissing on this ground.
Amendment History
Added by Judicial Conference, eff Sept 1, 1972; amd, L 1984, ch 421, § 2, eff July 19, 1984.
Source & verification. Provision text, History, and Advisory
Committee Notes are reproduced verbatim from the Consolidated Laws of New York.
Last verified July 21, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: forum non conveniens New YorkNew York inconvenient forum dismissaldismiss case for another state New YorkCPLR forum selection general obligations law 5-1402