Opinion
No. 00 Civ. 01511 (JSM).
February 2, 2001.
For plaintiff: Richard Kane, George David Rosenbaum, Broadway, Suite 2600 New York, NY.
For defendants: Scott P. Taylor, Quirk Bakalor, New York, NY. Jeffrey C. Sendziak Gibson, McAskill Crosby, Buffalo, N.Y. Lloyd Eisenberg, Shatzkin, Reiss Eisenpress New York, NY.
OPINION and ORDER
Michael Ornelas ("Plaintiff") brings this action for strict products liability and breach of warranty against J. Racenstein Co. ("Racenstein), Miller Equipment ("Miller"), Dalloz Safety, Inc. ("Dalloz"), WGM Safety Corp. ("WGM"), and Descent Control, Inc. ("Descent") (collectively "Defendants"). Defendants move to transfer this case to the Middle District of Florida pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404. Defendants' motion is granted.
On or about August 18, 1998, Plaintiff, a resident of Florida, was injured on the job on Marco Island, Florida. Plaintiff was using a portable chair descent system called the "Sky Genie" to wash windows on the outside of a building when the rope holding the chair allegedly broke and Plaintiff plunged five stories to the concrete below. Plaintiff alleges that the Sky Genie's brake system failed to stop the fall, and that he suffered extensive injuries as a result.
Section 1404(a) provides that:
[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). No party contests that venue is appropriate in the Middle District of Florida. Courts weigh the following factors in considering a motion for transfer: Plaintiff's initial choice of forum; convenience of the parties and the witnesses; relative ease of access to sources of proof; availability of compulsory process for the attendance of witnesses; location of relevant documents and other tangible evidence; the forum's familiarity with the governing law; trial efficiency; and the interest of justice. Dwyer v. General Motors Corp., 853 F. Supp. 690, 692 (S.D.N.Y. 1994)
Descent manufactured the rope used with the Sky Genie, and its principal place of business is in Arkansas. Descent also apparently owns the trademark registration for the Sky Genie. Miller manufactured the chair and other components of the Sky Genie, and its principal place of business is in Pennsylvania. Plaintiff alleges that Racenstein designed, assembled, warranted, and distributed the Sky Genie; Racenstein's principal place of business is in New York.
Defendants dispute the extent of Racenstein's involvement, arguing that Racenstein only sold and distributed the descent system and played no role in its design and assembly. Defendants therefore argue that New York has at best a peripheral connection to this litigation. Plaintiff has presented no proof that Racenstein did anything other than sell and warrant the system; Plaintiff relies only on the fact that Racenstein's name appears on the chair, along with Miller's, and on Racenstein's website, which proclaims that the Sky Genie is made up of "carefully matched components." Racenstein's extensive catalog merely advertises the Sky Genie as a product for sale along with many other products; it makes no representation of any involvement greater than that of a wholesaler. Plaintiff's assertions alone are insufficient to show that the Sky Genie was designed, manufactured, or assembled in New York.
Although a plaintiff's choice of forum is typically afforded great weight, where the "chosen forum is neither their home nor the place where the operative facts of the action occurred," this factor's importance is lessened. Dwyer, 853 F. Supp. at 694. Because the accident occurred in Florida, eyewitnesses concerning the cause of the accident and the physicians who treated Plaintiff are located there. Likewise, should the issue of Plaintiff's or his employer's negligent use of the descent system surface, any on-site witnesses would also be located in Florida. In addition, because Plaintiff's claims sound primarily in products Liability, much of the relevant evidence concerning the Sky Genie's design and manufacture will be located in Arkansas and Pennsylvania. See id. at 694. Because Racenstein did no more than advertise the product in its catalog, a fact apparently not in dispute, there will be little or no evidence from New York witnesses. Moreover, the only possible New York witnesses would be employees of Racenstein's, and it has joined in the motion to transfer. Thus, there are no New York witnesses complaining that they will be inconvenienced by the transfer.
Given the limited New York connection to the relevant events and evidence, and the substantial showing that there are a number of significant witnesses and relevant events in Florida, Defendants have carried their burdening of demonstrating that the convenience of the parties and witnesses is better served by transfer to Florida than by trial in New York. See Fontana v. E.A.R., 849 F. Supp. 212, 214-15 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).
In addition, it appears that New York's choice of law rules would likely point to application of the law of the state where the faulty product was designed and manufactured. See, e.g., Champlain Enters v. United States, 945 F. Supp. 468, 473-74 (N.D.N.Y. 1996); Hadar v. Concordia Yacht Builders. Inc., 886 F. Supp. 1082, 1093-94 (S.D.N.Y. 1995). Both a New York court and a Florida court are equally capable of applying the law of a third state or states. To the extent that a New York court would apply its more traditional rule of the place of the injury, Florida's law would apply.
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants' motion to transfer this case to the Middle District of Florida is granted.
SO ORDERED.