LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND CAPELETTI BROS., INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
ADAM FORD, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ALICE MAE FORD, DECEASED, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Liberty Mutual and Capeletti Bros. appealed the trial court's denial of their motion to transfer venue of a wrongful death action to Leon County. The appellate court affirmed, holding that while the claim against the Department of Transportation was properly transferred to Leon County where it is located, the remaining claims could properly stay in Palm Beach County within the trial court's discretion.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to transfer the entire case. While the DOT claim was properly transferred to Leon County as a governmental agency with an absolute right to be sued in its county of residence, the remaining claims against non-governmental defendants can properly remain in Palm Beach County within the trial court's discretion.
[1] A governmental agency has an absolute right to be sued in its county of residence, and claims against it may be transferred to that county.
[2] When a claim against a governmental agency is transferred to its county of residence, the venue of remaining claims against other defendants rests within the sound discre…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“This interlocutory appeal attacks the denial of a motion to transfer venue. We affirm.”
The court's statement of the issue and its disposition on the primary question.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAdam Ford, as personal representative of his deceased wife's estate, sued Liberty Mutual, Capeletti Bros., and other defendants including the State De…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Separate Trials cases and more on FLexlaw
MOORE, Judge.
This interlocutory appeal attacks the denial of a motion to transfer venue. We affirm.
The plaintiff (appellee-Ford) sued the appellants and other defendants, including the State Department of Transportation (DOT), in Palm Beach County for the wrongful death of his wife. The trial court correctly granted DOT’s motion to transfer to Leon County that portion of the claim which was against DOT. Carlile v. Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 354 So. 2d 362 (Fla.1977). Appellants thereupon moved to transfer the entire case to Leon County because of their pending cross-claim against DOT for indemnification and contribution. The denial of this latter motion forms the basis of this appeal.
Appellants contend that trying the issues involved amongst the various parties to this litigation in two different circuits before two different juries will result in chaos. Although we refrain from characterizing the results in such strong terms, we do appreciate the difficulties involved and the resultant confusion. Nevertheless, as we said in State of Florida, Department of Transportation v. Bromante, 365 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978): “This, of course, necessitates the plaintiff’s maintaining two suits instead of one, which is certainly not ideal but the remedy perhaps lies with the Legislature.”
The trial court’s reliance on Bro-mante, however, is misplaced. There, the court was concerned with three defendant governmental agencies each of which had an absolute right to be sued in its county of residence. In recognition of City of Boca Raton v. Walker, 354 So. 2d 440 (Fla.3rd DCA 1978) and Southern Gulf Utilities v. Mayo, 239 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969), this Court determined that separate trials are permissible when a governmental agency exercises its right to be sued in its county of residence. Here, only one of three defendants has such an absolute right. When the claim against that defendant is transferred, the venue of the remaining claims is within the sound discretion of the trial court. See, Stowers Equipment Rental Co. v. Brown, 370 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). We find no abuse of that discretion.
Accordingly, this cause is affirmed and remanded for further proceedings.
AFFIRMED.
LETTS, C. J., and HERSEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Carlile v. Game & Fresh Water Fish Comm'n of the State of Fla., 354 So. 2d 362 (Fla. 1977)
- State of Fla. Dept. OF Transp. v. Bromante, 365 So. 2d 388 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- S. Gulf Utils. v. Mayo, 239 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)
- City OF Boca Raton v. Walker, 354 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Stowers Equip. Rental Co. v. Donald L. Brown et ux., 370 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)