Ex parte Walter Industries6/6/2003
ons belong instead, assuming venue is proper in Jefferson County, in the Birmingham Division.
The petitioners, however, did not ask that the actions be transferred to the Birmingham Division of Jefferson County; instead, they requested that the actions be transferred to Tuscaloosa County. It is undisputed that Tuscaloosa County is a proper venue -- it is the county in which the "act or omission complained of" and "a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred. Ala. Code 1975, §§ 6-3-2(a)(3) and 6-3-7(a)(1). When a plaintiff commences an action in an improper forum, the defendant may move for a transfer of venue to a proper forum. Ex parte Alfa Mut. Gen. Ins. Co., 806 So. 2d 367, 369 (Ala. 2001); see also Ala. Code 1975, § 6-3-21. The defendants have demonstrated that the Bessemer Division is an improper forum; therefore, the defendants were entitled to a transfer of the actions to the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court. Ala. Code 1975, § 6-3-21. The defendants have demonstrated that the trial court erred in refusing to transfer the actions; accordingly, the petitions are granted. Alabama Power Co., 640 So. 2d at 922.
PETITIONS GRANTED; WRITS ISSUED.
See, Woodall, and Stuart, JJ., concur.
Houston and Harwood, JJ., concur specially.
Moore, C.J., and Lyons and Johnstone, JJ., dissent.
HOUSTON, Justice (concurring specially).
Pursuant to a motion filed by the defendants on November 27, 2001, to dismiss the actions or, in the alternative, to transfer venue, the trial court for the Bessemer Division transferred case no. 1011467 to the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court on December 26, 2001.
On January 23, 2002, Sarah June Adams, the plaintiff in case no. 1011467, filed a motion in the Jefferson Circuit Court, Bessemer Division ("Bessemer Division"), to reconsider the transfer of the action to the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court, and on March 15, 2002, the Bessemer Division trial court entered the following order: "Motion to reconsider is granted and case is not transferred."
Whether the Bessemer Division trial court had the power to set aside its order transferring the case is a concern of mine. See Ex parte MedPartners, Inc., 820 So. 2d 815, 821 (Ala. 2001). However, even if the Bessemer Division trial court did not have such power, a petition for a writ of mandamus directed to the transferor court (in this case the Bessemer Division) is the proper procedure to challenge the trial court's granting of the motion to reconsider and the trial court's refusal to transfer. Since the majority opinion holds that the petition in this case should be granted, I concur. HARWOOD, Justice (concurring specially).
I concur fully with the main opinion. I write further only to make the following observations.
Section 12-11-11, Ala. Code 1975, provides:
"Whenever it shall appear to the court that any case filed therein should have been brought in another court in the same county, the court shall make an order transferring the case to the proper court, and the clerk or register shall forthwith certify the pleadings, process, costs and order to the court to which the case is transferred, and the case shall be docketed and proceed in the court to which it is transferred, and the costs accrued in the court in which the case was originally filed shall abide by the result of the case in the court to which transferred."
"This statute vests in the court the power to order a transfer on his own motion ...." Ex parte Central of Georgia Ry., 243 Ala. 508, 513, 10 So. 2d 746, 750 (1942). Civil actions for which venue is otherwise proper in Jefferson County, but whic
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Alabama Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|