Civ Pro - Venue Flashcards
(6 cards)
Which of the following statements is correct?
A Objection cannot be made to improper venue
B Venue is considered to be objected to unless expressly waived
C Venue objections cannot be waived
D Venue is considered to be waived unless a timely objection is made
D Venue is considered to be waived unless a timely objection is made
For venue purposes, a business entity defendant is deemed to reside in:
A Any judicial district in which the defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction
B The judicial district in which the business entity is incorporated
C The judicial district in which the business entity’s owner is domiciled
D Any judicial district in which the defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to the action in question
D Any judicial district in which the defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to the action in question
A business entity defendant is deemed to reside in any judicial district in which the defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question.
The judicial district in which the business entity is incorporated is too narrow an answer. Not all business entities are incorporated.
Any judicial district in which the defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction is too broad an answer; the entity must be subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to the particular civil action in question.
The domicile of the business entity’s owner is irrelevant for venue purposes.
When a transfer is based on the ground that venue was improper, which law applies in the transferee court?
A The law of the transferor court
B The law of either court, whichever is more convenient
C The law of the transferee court
C The law of the transferee court
A transfer on the ground that the original choice of venue was improper generally results in a change of the law applicable under the Erie doctrine; i.e., the law of the state in which the transferee court sits now applies.
This is in contrast to a transfer on convenience grounds, in which case the law of the transferor court continues to apply.
A citizen of State A filed a complaint alleging negligence by two parties, both of whom reside in State B. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court of State B. However, the accident took place in State D, the plaintiff was treated by an emergency room physician in State D, and all of the witnesses reside in State D. Two months after they filed their respective answers, which did not address any problems with personal jurisdiction or venue, the defendants filed a joint motion to transfer the case to the District of State D.
May the court grant the motion?
A No, because the defendants have waived any issue as to venue by not raising the issue of venue in the answer.
B No, because a plaintiff is entitled to choose venue.
C Yes, because the defendants raised the issue in their first motion before the court.
D Yes, because transferring the case to the District of State D could be “in the interests of justice.”
D Yes, because transferring the case to the District of State D could be “in the interests of justice.”
The court could grant the motion. Pursuant to Rule 12(b), improper venue must be raised in a defendant’s first response-either in its timely motion to dismiss before the answer or in the answer, whichever is first. Here, though, venue was initially proper because the defendants resided in State B. Rather, the issue is whether the court may transfer the case from one proper venue to another. Such a transfer has no strict time limit. Rather, transfer is left to the discretion of the trial judge, and the judge may refuse transfer where the case has been pending for some time and would work a prejudice to one of the parties. Two months is likely not a sufficient period to prevent transfer of the case. Thus, (D) is correct. (C) is incorrect. First, it misstates Rule 12. Rule 12 defenses must be raised in the first motion or answer, whichever comes first. Second, transfer where venue is initially proper does not fall under the Rule 12 timing requirements. (B) is incorrect because, although a plaintiff is entitled to choose the initial venue, venue may be transferred, in the interests of justice, for the convenience of the parties and witnesses despite the plaintiff’s initial choice of the forum. (A) is incorrect because, as explained, transfer of venue in the interests of justice does not fall under the “first pleading or motion” rule.
When he turned 21, a young man who lived in State A decided to move to a city in State B. He loaded all his possessions in his truck and trailer and set out for State B. While en route, he was involved in a serious accident in State C with a woman driving an SUV, injuring both parties. Because of his injuries, the man has remained in State C for several months. However, he still intends to relocate to the city in State B as soon as he has recuperated and is able to travel. The woman, a citizen and resident of State D, is preparing to file a negligence action in federal district court against the man for the injuries she suffered in the State C accident.
If the woman files the action before the man proceeds to State B, in what federal district or districts is venue proper?
A The District of State C only.
B The District of State C and the District of State A.
C The District of State C and the District of State B.
D The District of State C, the District of State A, and the District of State B.
B The District of State C and the District of State A.
Venue is proper in the District of State C and the District of State A. Federal venue in civil actions is proper in (1) the district where any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the state in which the district is located; and (2) the district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. If there is no district anywhere in the United States that satisfies (1) or (2), the action may be brought in a judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action. Here, the District of State C is a proper venue because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred there. Additionally, at the time of the accident, the man’s domicile was in State A. It remains his domicile until he acquires a new one by being physically present in a new place while intending to make that new place his permanent home. The man did not acquire a new domicile in State B because he has yet to be physically present there (although he does intend to make it his permanent home). As a result, (B) is the correct answer. (A) is not correct because the answer does not discuss the possibility of venue being based on the man’s domicile. State C was not his domicile, because he does not intend to live indefinitely in State C. As stated above, State A remains his domicile. (C) and (D) are not correct because, as discussed above, the man has not made either place his domicile.
