Venue, transfer, forum non conveniens Flashcards
basic idea of venue
venue tells us exactly where to bring the case - which federal court
basic choices for P to bring case under the venue statute:
A P may lay venue in any district where:
(1) P may lay venue in any district where ALL Ds reside (residential venue)
human “resides” = federal district where she is domiciled
corporation “resides” = all districts where it is subject to PJ for the case at hand
OR
(2) P may lay venue in any district in a state if ALL Ds reside in that state [i.e. if D1 lives in N.D. Cal. and D2 lives in S.D. Cal = P may do any district in Cal.] [residential venue]
OR
(3) P may lay venue where a substantial part of the claim arose OR where a substantial part of the property involved in the lawsuit is located [transactional venue] …. note that this may arise in more than one district and either is proper
or
(4) if no other option is available [bc district does not fit any of those options], venue may be laid in a district that has personal jurisdiction over the defendant
UNLESS
case was removed to federal court, in which case venue is in the district embracing the state court where the action was filed
does it matter where P resides for venue purposes?
no
if D resides outside the US, where is venue proper?
venue is proper in any federal district court, but if another defendant does reside in the United States, venue must be proper as to her.
what is transfer?
case goes from one trial court to another trial court in same judicial system
fed court can transfer to another fed court but not to state court
transferor = og court; transferee = new court
requirements for venue transfer
GENERAL RULE:
transferee must be a proper venue and have PJ over the D, without waiver by the D
exception: court can transfer to any district (even an improper venue) if all parties consent and the court finds cause for the transfer.
SPECIFIC RULES:
STATUTE 1/ TRANSFER FROM PROPER VENUE – if original district is a proper venue, the court can order transfer to another venue that comports with the venue statute, personal, and subject matter jurisdiction, based on convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interests of justice. Because transfer overrides the P’s choice and P’s choice was proper, burden is on the person seeking transfer.
The court will consider public and private factors showing another court is the center of gravity for the case:
(a) Public: what law applies, what community should be burdened with jury service, the desire to keep a local controversy in a local court.
(b) Private: convenience. For example, it will look to where the defendants and evidence are found. [unless transfer is to give effect to forum selection clause]
(c) interests of justice
weight of the factors:
- plaintiff’s proper venue selection is entitled to substantial weight
- a transfer that simply shifts inconvenience from the defendant to the plaintiff is not based on adequate grounds to transfer
Choice of law: transferee court must apply choice of law rules of transferor court [unless transfer is to give effect to a valid forum selection clause]
.
.
.
STATUTE 2 / TRANSFER FROM IMPROPER VENUE – If the original district is an improper venue, the court may transfer in the interest of justice or dismiss. Usually, the court will transfer if possible.
Choice of law: transferee applies its own choice of law rules of the state in which it sits and NOT the choice of law rules of the transferor court
what is the effect of a forum selection clause on transfer of venue?
when are they enforceable
WHAT IS IT:
A forum selection clause (“FSC”) is a provision in which the parties agree that a dispute between them will be litigated in a particular place.
If one party sues the other in violation of an FSC, the defendant may seek to enforce the FSC through a motion to transfer (assuming the FSC called for litigation in a proper federal district).
WHEN ENFORCEABLE:
Federal law enforces FSCs if they’re not unreasonable. Some states do not. But in federal court, federal law governs transfer. So a federal court may enforce an FSC clause even though a state court in that forum state would not
HOW THEY AFFECT TRANSFER
(1) When there is a valid FSC, only public interest factors are considered for transfer; and
(2) choice of law: if transfer is done to enforce a valid FSC, the transferee court will apply its own choice of law rules. The transfer does not carry the transferor court’s choice of law rules with it.
what is forum nonconveniens and when does it apply?
factors court considers
applies when there is another court that is the center of gravity for the case but that court is not able to be transferred because it is in a different judicial system (i.e. the case was filed in state but needs a federal forum)
The court invoking FNC will stay (hold it in abeyance) or dismiss the case.
Whether the court dismisses or stays, the idea is that the plaintiff will then sue in the other court, and the court may impose conditions on the party requesting transfer such as requiring her to waive service of process.
court will consider those public private factors considered in transfer cases
[note that some essays treat forum nonconveniens as being available for transfering case from one federal court to another]
