Motion to Dismiss Based on Forum Non Conveniens. Trial Rule 4.4(C) imposes no mandatory obligations upon trial courts in dismissing a case on forum non conve-niens grounds; rather, the court may dismiss “under such reasonable conditions as the court in its discretion may determine to be just.” See also Anyango, 971 N.E.2d at 663 (noting that “our Trial Rule 4.4(C) wisely entrusts the forum non conveniens decision to the trial court.”). Moreover, Rule 4.4(C)’s enumerated list of factors is merely permissive, to the point of including a catch-all provision of “any other factors having substantial bearing upon the selection of a convenient, reasonable and fair place of trial.” Accordingly, the trial court’s summary dismissal was adequate as a matter of law. See Inman, 981 N.E.2d at 1208 (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added in Inman). Our review is
holding that prejudgment interest may include compound interest holding that an award of prejudgment interest under  113f of cercla is mandatory holding summary rejection of request for interest was not an abuse of discretion under indcode  345147 which states the court may award prejudgment interest as part of a judgment holding that award and rate of prejudgment interest are within trial courts discretion holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding prejudgment interest on attorneys fees paid prior to the entry of judgment