Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

197 F. Supp. 871

Manning v. Manning

U.S. District Court

Decided September 13, 1961

U.S. District Court · decided 1961-09-13

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1966

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1406

Relies on Olberding v. Illinois Central Railroad · 83 F. Supp. 516 - Freiday v. Cowdin

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1961-09-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

GOURLEY, Chief Judge.

¶1In this diversity action based upon a support agreement entered between a husband and wife, the question is posed as to whether under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1406(a) in the interests of justice this action should be transferred to the Southern District of Florida.

¶2Based upon the allegations of the complaint, which this Court in evaluating a motion to dismiss is required to accept as true, plaintiff alleges that she is a resident of Florida and that defendant is a resident of South Carolina. Defendant contends in his answer that he is a resident of Florida.

¶3It is not in dispute that defendant was formally served by the United States Marshal within the confines of the Western District of Pennsylvania.

¶4In view of plaintiff being a resident of the State of Florida, and defendant being a resident of South Carolina and/or Florida, it is apparent that venue does not exist in this Court. Olberding v. Illinois Central R. Co., 346 U.S. 338, 74 S.Ct. 83, 98 L.Ed. 39.

¶5The question is posed, therefore, that where venue does not exist in a cause of action filed in a United States District Court, does said District Court have the authority to transfer said action to another jurisdiction under the doctrine of forum non conveniens where defendant has not waived venue?

¶6This Court is governed by 28 U.S.C.A. § 1406(a) which provides as follows:

“(a) The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying *872venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.” (Emphasis supplied.)

¶7It appears apparent upon a reading of said statute that where venue is not properly laid in this District, the Court in the interest of justice may transfer such case to any district in which said action could have been brought. Freiday v. Cowdin, D.C., 83 F.Supp. 516.

¶8Justice requires that the plaintiff should have her rights adjudicated. I shall, therefore, direct that the above civil aetion be transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division.

¶9An appropriate order is entered.

/197/fsupp/871 · .json · Public domain