BANYAN TREATMENT AND RECOVERY, LLC
v.
EMAN BASS

Fla. 4th DCA | 2024-10-02
No. 4D2024-0887
2024 FL 11792 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2024)

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.


Holding

A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to transfer venue on grounds of convenience when the motion lacks supporting affidavits or sworn proof.


Headnotes

[1] A motion to transfer venue based on convenience must be supported by affidavits or other sworn proof; absent such support, transfer is improper.

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“A transfer of venue based on convenience is improper where no affidavits or other sworn proof support the motion.”

Graham v. Graham citation regarding requirements for venue transfer motions

Facts & Procedural History

Banyan Treatment and Recovery entities appealed a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for Broward County. The trial court denied appellants' motion …

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

Appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Jeffrey Levenson, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE23-16861.

Thomas E. Jablonski and Jennifer Thomas of Hall Booth Smith, P.C., West Palm Beach, for appellants.

Scott L. Henratty of Morgan & Morgan, P.A., Plantation, and Thomas E. Bosworth of Bosworth Law, LLC, Philadelphia, PA, for appellee. PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Fla. R. Civ P 1.061(a) (“The decision to grant or deny the motion for dismissal rests in the sound discretion of the trial court.”); Cortez v. Palace Resorts, Inc., 123 So. 3d 1085, 1096 (Fla. 2013) (“[E]xcept where the plaintiff is from another country, the presumption in favor of the plaintiff’s initial choice of forum is always entitled to great deference.”); Graham v. Graham, 648 So. 2d 814, 815–16 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (“A transfer of venue based on convenience is improper where no affidavits or other sworn proof support the motion.”).

Affirmed. KLINGENSMITH, C.J., WARNER and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw