 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
DML8/23/2005
Submitted on Briefs: January 11, 2005
Three of the four original Plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, granting Defendants' motion to change venue. We affirm.
We address the following issue on appeal:
Did the District Court err when it granted Junga Juice/Fulbrights' motion for change of venue?
BACKGROUND
Junga Juice, Inc., a business that sells juice smoothies, was started in Missoula in the late 1990s by Kevin and Cari Fulbright and soon became successful. The three Defendants will be referred to as "Junga Juice/Fulbrights." Plaintiff DML, Inc., contracted with Junga Juice to open a franchise Junga Juice store in Billings. Plaintiffs Junga Juice, Inc., of South Dakota, which will be referred to as "South Dakota Junga Juice," and MTAZ, LLC, contracted with Defendants to open franchise stores in Rapid City, South Dakota, and Flagstaff, Arizona, respectively. Dennis Rowe, an original Plaintiff whose appeal was dismissed by stipulation of the parties, contracted to open a franchise in Bozeman.
The franchise agreement between DML and Junga Juice/Fulbrights provided that if DML initiated a court action against the Defendants for breach of the franchise agreement, DML could elect to initiate such proceedings in Yellowstone County. The franchise agreement between the now dismissed Plaintiff Rowe and Junga Juice/Fulbrights stated that venue of any action would be in Missoula County. The agreements with South Dakota Junga Juice and MTAZ provided that they may elect venue in Missoula County.
All the Plaintiffs joined in a suit against Junga Juice/Fulbrights which they filed in Yellowstone County alleging negligent misrepresentation, deceit, rescission, declaratory relief, breach of contract, bad faith, interference with prospective economic advantage, and interference with contract. Junga Juice/Fulbrights moved for a change of venue to Missoula County and for separate trials on the claims of the several Plaintiffs. The District Court granted the motion to change venue of the entire action to Missoula County in the interest of judicial economy and further, because the claims were based in contract, the negotiations took place in Missoula County for three of the four Plaintiffs, and three of the four franchise agreements provided that venue was proper in Missoula. The District Court also allowed DML to file a motion to sever its claims and keep its action in Yellowstone County, should it so desire. Plaintiffs DML, South Dakota Junga Juice, and MTAZ appeal from this order.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The determination of whether a county is the proper place for trial is a question of law involving the application of the venue statutes to pleaded facts. Nelson v. Cenex, Inc., 2004 MT 170, 5, 322 Mont. 54, 5, 97 P.3d 1073, 5 (citation omitted). Accordingly, our review of a district court's grant or denial of a motion for change of venue is plenary; we determine whether the court's ruling was legally correct. Nelson, 5 (citation omitted).
DISCUSSION
Did the District Court err when it granted Junga Juice/Fulbrights' motion for change of venue?
DML, South Dakota Junga Juice, and MTAZ assert that Yellowstone County is a proper venue for their combined claims and argue, pursuant to ยง 25-2-114, MCA, that a defendant's right to move for change of venue arises only when the action is brought in a county not designated as a proper place of trial. They argue further that judicial economy is not served by changing the venue to Missoula.
Junga Juice/Fulbrights argue that while Yellowsto
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Montana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|