ROY E. HALL, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2013-06-19
No. 3D13-56
Before CORTIÑAS and EMAS, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.
118 So. 3d 847 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2013) Caution
Cited by 6 cases

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.

Synopsis

Hall and his wife appealed a trial court order transferring their tobacco litigation case from Miami-Dade County to Orange County Circuit Court. The appellate court affirmed the transfer, finding that Orange County was the proper venue as the plaintiffs were Orange County residents with no connection to Miami-Dade County.


Holding

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in transferring the case to Orange County. As an Orange County case with Orange County residents as parties and all relevant connections to Orange County, the case properly belonged in Orange County rather than Miami-Dade County.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court's decision to transfer venue is within its sound discretion and will not be overturned on appeal absent an abuse of discretion.

[2] Venue transfer is appropriate when the convenience of the parties or witnesses, or the interest of justice, dictates.

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“The decision to transfer venue ... is 'one within the sound discretion of the trial court, and absent a demonstration of an abuse of discretion, the lower court's determination will not be overturned on appeal.'”

Establishes the legal standard for reviewing venue transfer orders on appeal—abuse of discretion standard

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Roy E. Hall and his wife were residents of Orange County throughout his smoking history and treatment for smoking-related conditions. The case involve…

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.


Opinion of the Court
SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

Hall and his wife, plaintiffs in an Engle1 action claiming damages resulting from his allegedly addictive cigarette smoking, appeal from an order transferring the case under section 47.122, Florida Statutes (2013)2 from the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court to the Orange County Circuit Court. We affirm.

On the one hand, the Halls are now and have been residents of Orange County throughout his history of smoking and the treatment for its results; on the other, Miami-Dade has no relevant3 connection whatever to the case: it is neither the location of the underlying facts and circumstances, nor the residence of any of the parties or potential witnesses. On this basis, it is apparent that, at a minimum, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering the order below, as is required for reversal. See Fla. Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Fla. Physicians’ Ins. Reciprocal, 507 So.2d 778, 779 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (“The decision to transfer venue ... is ‘one within the sound discretion of the trial court, and absent a demonstration of an abuse of discretion, the lower court’s determination will not be overturned on appeal.’ ”) (internal citation omitted); Stoppa v. Water Oak Mgmt. Corp., 584 So.2d 161, 163 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (“As a general rule, a trial court has wide discretion in determining whether or not venue of a trial should be changed.”). See also Kelly-Springfield Tire Co. v. Moore, 355 So.2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) (reversing order denying transfer of case from Dade County to Highlands County).

In short, this is an Orange County case which belongs in Orange County. See Della-Donna v. Gore Newspaper Co., 390 So.2d 87, 87-88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (“In sum, this is a [Broward County] case, which belongs in Broward County.”) (relying on Leinberger v. Webster, 66 F.R.D. 28, 35 (E.D.N.Y.1975)) (“In sum, this is a Vermont case.”); Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 673 So.2d 958, 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (“It is ‘in the interest of justice,’ ... that a Dade County jury, which is both a scarce and precious resource, should not be burdened with determining a case that has no connection with Dade County.”); Pep Boys v. Montilla, 62 So.3d 1162, 1166 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (“The last factor — the interest of justice — also weighs in favor of Sarasota County ... Broward County’s connections to the case are that the plaintiff’s attorney is from there and the tire had been sold and installed there. Broward County is a larger, more populous county, has crowded dockets, and the community has virtually no connection to the case.”).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Lesia Mooney, 147 So. 3d 42 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
    …discernible witnesses, that discretion is substantially limited. Compare Hu, 426 So. 2d at 1279-81 (finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when witnesses resided in various potential forums) with Hall v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 118 So. 3d 847, 848 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Widdick, 717 So. 2d 572, 573-74 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (both finding that venue was improper in a forum where no witnesses reside). In this case, the fact witnesses identified by the part…
  • Romilio F. Marques, M.D. v. Garcia, 245 So. 3d 900 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
    …een brought to Miami-Dade County for the convenience of a plaintiff's attorneys, which does not qualify as a basis to oppose the motion to transfer), "this is a Collier County case which belongs in Collier County." Hall v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 118 So. 3d 847, 848 & n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (citing Della-Donna v. Gore Newspaper Co., 390 So. 2d 87, 87-88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) ). For these reasons, I respectfully dissent and would reverse the order denying the appellants' motion to transfer venue to Collier Co…
  • Muro v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 245 So. 3d 1010 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Hall v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 118 So. 3d 847, 848 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (concluding: "In short, this is an Orange County case which belongs in Orange County") (citing Della-Donna v. Gore Newspaper Co., 390 So. 2d 87, 87-88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (concluding: " 'In sum, this is a Broward County case,…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw