Summary
granting transfer from Eastern District of Pennsylvania to Middle District where, among other things, "the accident at issue occurred in the Middle District"
Summary of this case from Lempke v. Gen. Elec. Co.Opinion
No. 04-3708.
November 16, 2004
ORDER
Presently pending is Defendant NES's Motion to Transfer and Defendant Genie Industries, Inc.'s Response in Opposition thereto. To date, the court has not received a response from Plaintiffs. Upon careful consideration of the factors promulgated in Jumara v. State Farm Ins. Co., 55 F.3d 873, 879 (3d Cir. 1995), this court finds that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), transfer of venue is warranted because Defendant has met its burden of demonstrating a strong case for transfer. 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) provides: "For 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." The burden of establishing the need for transfer, however, rests with the movant.
While there is no definitive formula or list of the factors to consider, courts have considered many variants of the private and public interests protected by the language of § 1404(a). The private interests have included: plaintiff's forum preference as manifested in the original choice, the defendant's preference; whether the claim arose elsewhere; the convenience of the parties as indicated by their relative physical and financial condition; the convenience of the witnesses — but only to the extent that the witnesses may actually be unavailable for trial in one of the fora; and the location of books and records (similarly limited to the extent that the files could not be produced in the alternative forum) . . . The public interests have included: the enforceability of the judgment; practical considerations that could make the trial easy, expeditious, or inexpensive; the relative administrative difficulty in the two fora resulting from court congestion; the local interest in deciding local controversies at home, the public policies of the fora; and the familiarity of the trial judge with the applicable state law in diversity cases. (citations omitted). Jumara, 55 F.3d at 879. As Defendant NES states, Plaintiffs reside in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, the accident at issue occurred in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, many of the witnesses expected to testify in this matter reside or are otherwise located in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, and Plaintiff's initial medical treatment took place in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Plaintiffs have not responded to Defendant NES's motion. Defendant Genie Industries, Inc.'s response to Defendant's motion to transfer is that Plaintiff's choice of forum should not be disturbed and also that Defendant Genie prefers to remain in this district. However, as stated by the Court in Jumara, numerous factors may be considered by a court deciding a motion to transfer. Neither Defendant Genie nor Plaintiffs state that any witnesses located in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania are unavailable to testify in person should trial take place in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Furthermore, although Plaintiffs have retained counsel in this District and one of the Defendants conducts business, but is not based here, there is no other apparent connection between the underlying incident and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. For the foregoing reasons, Defendant NES's motion to transfer is granted.AND NOW, this 16th day of November 2004, upon consideration of Defendant NES's Motion to Transfer and Defendant Genie's Response thereto, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant NES's Motion is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court transfer this matter to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.