Summary
denying intra-district transfer from St. Louis to Hannibal
Summary of this case from Teter v. BNSF Railway CompanyOpinion
No. 2:00 CV 85 DDN
December 20, 2000
John D. Beger, BEGER AND BUSHIE, LLC., Rolla, Mo., Bryan D. Scheiderer, Rolla, Mo., for plaintiff.
William A. Brasher, John H. Marshall, BRASHER LAW FIRM, L.C. St. Louis, Mo., for defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action is before the Court upon the motion of plaintiffs Patricia Dorrell and Bryon Darrell, Sr., for a change of divisional venue (Doc. No. 14). The parties have consented to the exercise of plenary authority by the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c).
Plaintiffs commenced this action in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis. Plaintiffs allege that on April 22, 1998, decedent Bryon R. Dorrell, Jr., their son, was killed in a collision between the pickup truck he was driving and a locomotive train at the County Road 202 crossing located in Chariton County, Missouri. Plaintiffs allege that their son died as a result of the negligence of the locomotive operator, who was employed by defendant, and by the defendant's negligent operation of the tracks and crossing where the collision occurred.
On October 25, 2000, defendant removed this action to the Northern Division of this Court, where Chariton County is located. Plaintiffs have moved to transfer this action to the Eastern Division under Local Rule 3-2.07 and 28 U.S.C. § 1404 for the convenience of the parties and witnesses.
Under Local Rule 3-2.07(B)(1), "[a]ll actions brought against a single defendant who is a resident of this district must be brought in the division where the defendant resides, or where the claim for relief arose." For venue purposes, a corporate defendant is considered a resident of the division where it has its principal place of business.See Local Rule 3-2.07(B)(4). Local Rule 32.07(D) provides in relevant part, "The Court in its discretion may transfer a civil action to another division pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (a) or § 1406(a).
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (a), the action may be transferred "for the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice . . . to any other district or division where it might have been brought." See 28 U.S.C. § 1404 (a). The Court may consider any relevant factor indicated by the facts of the case. Cf., Terra International Inc. v. Miss. Chemical Corp., 119 F.3d 688, 691 (8th Cir. 1997)
First, this action was properly filed initially in the Northern Division of this Court, because the claim arose in Chariton County which is located in that division. See Local Rule 3-207(B)(1). It is not disputed that defendant's principal place of business is in Texas.
When considering a motion to transfer venue, a plaintiff's choice of forum should only be disturbed when the balance of factors strongly favors the defendant. Fibra-Steel, Inc. v. Astoria Industries, Inc., 708 F. Supp. 255, 257 (E.D. Mo. 1989). Of the criteria set forth in § 1404(a), the convenience of witnesses is the most important factor. May Department Stores Co. v. Wilansky, 900 F. Supp. 1154, 1165 (E.D. Mo. 1995).
The trial of this action in this division would cause substantial expense and inconvenience to witnesses for both the plaintiff and the defendant. Plaintiffs argue that, although they reside in Linn County, in the Northern Division, during the trial proceedings they would stay with a relative who resides in the Eastern Division. In the Court's estimation, the resulting convenience to the plaintiffs by transfer could also be accomplished by keeping the case in the Northern division.
Almost all of the relevant witnesses reside in the Northern Division. Only one witness of the plaintiffs, their liability expert, resides in the Eastern Division. Defendant has pointed out that the relevant locomotive conductor and engineer, the investigating Missouri Highway Patrol Officer, the likely witnesses to the condition of the track crossing, and the likely witnesses to the activities of the decedent (who resided in Chariton County) all reside substantially closer to the Court's Northern Division courthouse facility in Hannibal than they do to St. Louis where the Eastern Division holds court.
The balance of the convenience of the parties and of the witnesses strongly favors keeping the trial venue of this action in the Northern Division.
Whereupon,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion of the plaintiffs to transfer the venue of this action (Doc. No. 14) is denied.