SUSAN LEVY AND HOWARD LEVY, HER HUSBAND, APPELLANTS,
v.
HAWK'S CAY, INC., HAWK'S CAY INVESTORS LTD.; BRANDY GROUP, INC., BRANDY MARINE OF THE KEYS; SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO.; MURRAY OHIO MANUFACTURING CO.; AND JEFFREY SYLVESTER, APPELLEES
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.
The court affirmed a venue transfer from Dade County to Monroe County in a negligence/products liability action because the trial court had a reasonable basis for the transfer and did not abuse its discretion.
A venue transfer from Dade County to Monroe County under Florida Statutes Section 47.122 is affirmed where the action arose in Monroe County and the majority of witnesses reside there.
[1] A trial court does not abuse its discretion in transferring venue under Florida Statutes Section 47.122 when the action arose in the transferee county and the majority of…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiffs sued for negligence and products liability. The trial court transferred venue from Dade County to Monroe County, finding that 31 of 61 non-…
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 Gross Abuse Of Discretion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The non-final order transferring the venue of the instant negligence/products liability action below from Dade County to Monroe County, Florida, under Section 47.122, Florida Statutes (1985), is affirmed because, simply stated, there was a reasonable basis in the record for such a decision and, accordingly, no gross abuse of discretion has been shown. This is so due to the fact that: (a) the action sued upon arose in Monroe County, (b) thirty-one of the sixty non-party witnesses in this cause reside in Monroe County, and (c) very few witnesses in the cause are located in Dade County.
Accordingly, it can reasonably be said that (1) substantial inconvenience to the parties has been shown below for the case to be tried in Dade County, and (2) Monroe County is a far more convenient county in which to try this cause than is Dade County. We have not overlooked the contrary arguments raised by the plaintiffs/appellants, but we conclude that none can carry the day in demonstrating a gross abuse of discretion. See Sun Bank of Ocala v. International Harvester Co., 408 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Della-Donna v. Gore Newspaper Co., 390 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), pet. for review denied, 399 So. 2d 1141 (Fla.1981); Kelly-Springfield Tire Co. v. Moore, 355 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Peterson, Howell & Heather v. O’Neill, 314 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Derrick & Assocs. Pathology, P.A. v. Gary V. Kuehl, M.D., 617 So. 2d 866 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…such a decision, no gross abuse of discretion was shown as to counts three and four in ordering their transfer to Palm Beach County. Accordingly, the trial judge’s decision as to counts three and four should be upheld. See Levy v. Hawk’s Cay, Inc., 505 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). We conclude, however, that counts one and two must be tried in Orange County because of the contract provision. But, there is no reason counts three and four must be held hostage to counts one and two. On remand, the trial judge…
-
Barry S. Mankowitz, M.D. v. Staub, 553 So. 2d 1299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…er forum. The fact that certain expert witnesses and treating physicians reside in Dade County is not sufficient to defeat Monroe County venue. See Inter-American Sunbelt Corp. v. Borozny, 512 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Levy v. Hawk’s Cay, Inc., 505 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Della-Donna v. Gore Newspaper Co., 390 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), review denied, 399 So. 2d 1141 (Fla.1981). Accordingly, we reverse the non-final orders under review and remand the cause for further proceedings not inconsis…
-
Estela M. Harp and Jeffrey Harp v. Am. Honda Motor Co., Inc., 508 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…ant to section 47.122, Florida Statutes (1985). See Tucker v. Fianson, 484 So. 2d 1370 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Hu v. Crockett, 426 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Bingham v. Manson, 363 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). See also Levy v. Hawk’s Cay, Inc., 505 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), and cases cited therein. LETTS, GLICKSTEIN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Peterson v. O'Neill, 314 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- The Kelly-Springfield Tire Co. v. Noreene Moore, 355 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Alphonse Della-Donna v. Gore Newspaper Co., 390 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- SUN Bank OF Ocala v. Int'l Harvester Co., 408 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)