Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
50. What is the railroad's best argument in support of the motion?
The railroad has moved the State A federal court to transfer the action to the State B federal district court. State B has only one federal district.
A passenger domiciled in State A has brought a federal diversity action in State A against a railroad, seeking damages for injuries suffered when the railroad's train, which the passenger boarded in State A, derailed in State B. The railroad is incorporated and has its principal place of business in State B and operates in States A and B. Several other passengers were also injured and have brought individual actions in State B federal court.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
B is incorrect. The fact that an action may share questions of fact with similar actions pending in another state is not a driving factor in a change-of-venue analysis. Rather, what matters most is the convenience of the parties and witnesses, and the «interests of justice.»
C is incorrect. Although the railroad's incorporation and location in State B are factors that would make State B a convenient forum for this action, they are not determinative, i.e., they would not on their own form a basis for rejecting the forum selected by the passenger.
D is incorrect. Venue is proper in a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions that gave rise to the claim occurred. Thus, venue could be proper in the State A federal court, depending on facts not set out in the question, such as where the railroad maintained or housed the train. However, even if venue were not proper in State A, the appropriate remedy would be dismissal. To support a transfer to State B federal court, the railroad would need to argue that a federal court in State B would be more convenient for the parties and the witnesses.