Owens v. Griffin Wood Company, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Justia Opinion Summary
Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Supreme Court of Alabama?
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More ›
You already receive new opinion summaries from Supreme Court of Alabama. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
Petitioners James Waltman and Progressive Casualty Insurance Company petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus to direct the Perry Circuit Court to vacate its order that denied their respective motions to transfer the underlying action to the Tuscaloosa Circuit Court. The underlying case arose from a truck accident in which a utility trailer Waltman was towing disconnected from his vehicle and struck Respondent John Owens' truck. Owens was injured from the accident. Owens filed suit against Waltman, Progressive and GEICO Indemnity Company, including a workers' compensation claim against his employer Griffin Wood, alleging that he was working within the scope of his employment when the accident took place. Owens filed the action in Perry County because Griffin Wood's principal place of business was in Perry County. Waltman filed a motion to transfer venue, contending that a more appropriate forum would be Tuscaloosa since the accident took place in Tuscaloosa County. Upon review, the Supreme Court concluded that the circuit court exceeded its discretion in denying Waltman's and Progressive's motions for change of venue, and granted their petitions for the writ of mandamus. The Court directed the Perry Circuit Court to transfer the case.
Download PDF
REL: 01/11/2013 Notice: This o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n before p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e Reporter o f Decisions, Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r . SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013 1111598 Ex p a r t e James Waltman PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (In r e : John Owens v. G r i f f i n Wood Company, Inc., e t a l . ) 1120080 Ex p a r t e P r o g r e s s i v e Casualty Insurance Company PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS (In r e : John Owens v. G r i f f i n Wood Company, Inc., e t a l . ) (Perry C i r c u i t Court, CV-11-900075) WISE, Justice. James Waltman a n d P r o g r e s s i v e C a s u a l t y I n s u r a n c e ("Progressive") Company ( h e r e i n a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o c o l l e c t i v e l y as " t h e petitioners") separately petition this Court f o r a writ of mandamus d i r e c t i n g t h e P e r r y C i r c u i t C o u r t t o v a c a t e i t s o r d e r denying Waltman's a n d P r o g r e s s i v e ' s m o t i o n s t o t r a n s f e r t h i s a c t i o n from the P e r r y C i r c u i t Court t o the Tuscaloosa Court and t o e n t e r an o r d e r granting the motions. Circuit We grant the p e t i t i o n s and i s s u e t h e w r i t s . F a c t s and P r o c e d u r a l H i s t o r y On J u l y 1 4 , 2 0 1 1 , J o h n Owens, a r e s i d e n t o f H a l e and an Wood"), employee was Tuscaloosa At of Griffin operating Wood a log truck Company, Inc. on G r e e n s b o r o County ("Griffin Avenue i n C o u n t y ; t h e l o g t r u c k was n o t c a r r y i n g any l o g s . t h e same t i m e , Waltman, a r e s i d e n t o f T u s c a l o o s a was o p e r a t i n g a v e h i c l e t h a t was t o w i n g G r e e n s b o r o Avenue. disconnected from The utility his vehicle resulting i n injuries t o Owens. 2 trailer and a utility trailer Waltman was struck County, Owens's on towing truck, 1111598 a n d 1120080 On December Progressive, included based 20, 2011, Owens s u e d G r i f f i n a n d GEICO I n d e m n i t y Company Wood, Waltman, ("GEICO"). a w o r k e r s ' compensation c l a i m against on an a l l e g a t i o n that he was w o r k i n g s c o p e o f h i s employment f o r G r i f f i n accident; claims of negligence, Owens Griffin Wood i n the l i n e and Wood a t t h e t i m e o f t h e wanton and r e c k l e s s conduct, and n e g l i g e n t , r e c k l e s s , a n d / o r w a n t o n v i o l a t i o n s o f t h e r u l e s of the road against motorist claims alleged, i n part, Waltman; against that he and Progressive filed uninsured/underinsuredand GEICO. the a c t i o n i n Perry b e c a u s e G r i f f i n Wood's p r i n c i p a l p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s County. See § 6 - 3 - 7 ( a ) ( 2 ) , Waltman alleges subsequently dismissed 1 A l a . Code 1 9 7 5 . in his petition from the case. 2 that GEICO With regard to the venue f o r actions c o r p o r a t i o n s , § 6-3-7 p r o v i d e s , i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t : "(a) A l l c i v i l a c t i o n s a g a i n s t c o r p o r a t i o n s be b r o u g h t i n any o f t h e f o l l o w i n g c o u n t i e s : " 3 County i s i n Perry 2 "(2) In the county corporation's principal office state " Owens 1 of in the this was against may 1111598 a n d 1120080 On F e b r u a r y 8, 2012, Waltman f i l e d a motion to transfer the a c t i o n from P e r r y County t o T u s c a l o o s a County. In support of h i s motion, Waltman contended that venue would be a p p r o p r i a t e i n T u s c a l o o s a County p u r s u a n t t o § 6-3-2(3), A l a . Code 1975, b e c a u s e t h e a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d i n T u s c a l o o s a County; because the "hitch on trailer Waltman was p u l l i n g had been a t t a c h e d t o h i s v e h i c l e company i n Tuscaloosa t h e tongue [County of the u t i l i t y o n ] t h e morning by a o f " the a c c i d e n t ; a n d b e c a u s e Waltman was t h e n r e s i d i n g i n T u s c a l o o s a County a n d he was a r e s i d e n t o f T u s c a l o o s a C o u n t y a t the time t h e a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d a n d a t t h e t i m e t h e c o m p l a i n t was f i l e d . Waltman also argued that P e r r y County's connection c l a i m s was v e r y weak a n d t h a t T u s c a l o o s a C o u n t y ' s t o t h e c l a i m s was much s t r o n g e r . that Perry Griffin County County's only connection Wood h a s i t s p r i n c i p a l and t h a t , although Specifically, place Owens to the connection he contended t o t h e case i s that of business i n Perry had a l l e g e d that he was e n g a g e d i n t h e l i n e a n d s c o p e o f h i s d u t i e s as an e m p l o y e e o f Griffin Wood a t t h e t i m e o f t h e a c c i d e n t , h i s l o g t r u c k was n o t c a r r y i n g any l o g s a t t h e t i m e o f t h e a c c i d e n t . citing § 6-3-21.1, A l a . Code 1975, Waltman 4 argued Therefore, that the 1111598 a n d 1120080 a c t i o n s h o u l d be t r a n s f e r r e d t o T u s c a l o o s a C o u n t y b a s e d on t h e interest-of-justice prong of the doctrine of forum non conveniens. On February motion to t r a n s f e r t h e case from P e r r y County t o T u s c a l o o s a County. It adopted 9, 2012, P r o g r e s s i v e i n i t sentirety the motion filed Waltman a filed. Also, c i t i n g § 6 - 3 - 2 ( a ) ( 3 ) , A l a . Code 1975, i t a r g u e d t h a t venue f o r an automobile accident i s normally proper i n the county i n which the accident occurred or the county i n which the a l l e g e d tortfeasor resides, Tuscaloosa County. On April 4, both 2012, Owens motions to transfer. County have a s t r o n g resident corporations compensation benefits interest and owed i n this filed He a r g u e d argued t h a t the p r o v i s i o n the of which, that an case, would opposition the c i t i z e n s i n the a f f a i r s to the of Perry o f one o f i t s the determination of t o i t s employees. workers' Owens f o r s u b r o g a t i o n i n § 25-5-11(a) w o r k e r s ' compensation a c t " c l e a r l y s e t s f o r t h a s t r o n g i n t e r e s t and c o n n e c t i o n i n t h e motor v e h i c l e a c c i d e n t case t o P e r r y County. Namely, one o f t h e e m p l o y e r s a n d p a r t i c i p a n t s i n P e r r y County's a l l - i m p o r t a n t t i m b e r b u s i n e s s has a r i g h t t o be f u l l y compensated f o r any b e n e f i t s 5 be also of 1111598 a n d 1120080 e x t e n d e d t o Owens f r o m Owens'[s] i n j u r i e s . " Finally, tried he a r g u e d i n a county occurred." strong Owens connection the party t h a t "Alabama responsiblef o r law i s r e p l e t e with cases o t h e r t h a n where an [ a u t o m o b i l e ] a c c i d e n t concluded that t o and i n t e r e s t Perry County d i d have i n t h e case and a that, t h e r e f o r e , t h e i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e w o u l d n o t r e q u i r e a change o f venue f r o m P e r r y C o u n t y t o T u s c a l o o s a C o u n t y . 2012, On A p r i l 1 1 , Waltman f i l e d a r e p l y t o Owens's o p p o s i t i o n . G r i f f i n Wood moved t o b i f u r c a t e t h e w o r k e r s ' count from t h e o t h e r counts compensation i n the complaint. On A p r i l 29, 2012, t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t g r a n t e d t h e m o t i o n , o r d e r i n g t h a t " t h e workers' compensation c l a i m s h a l l be t r i e d w i t h o u t a j u r y a n d s e p a r a t e l y from t h e r e m a i n i n g counts i n t h i s lawsuit." On May 16, 2012, Waltman f i l e d a s u p p l e m e n t to transfer. I n that supplement, he cited t o h i s motion this Court's d e c i s i o n i n Ex p a r t e S o u t h e a s t A l a b a m a T i m b e r H a r v e s t i n g , L L C , 94 So. 3d 371 ( A l a . 2 0 1 2 ) , the t r a n s f e r t o Tuscaloosa On motions September 9, as b e i n g on p o i n t a n d s u p p o r t i n g County. 2012, t h e c i r c u i t t o t r a n s f e r the case. court These p e t i t i o n s Standard o f Review 6 denied the followed. 1111598 a n d 1120080 "A p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t o f mandamus i s t h e a p p r o p r i a t e 'method f o r o b t a i n i n g r e v i e w o f a d e n i a l o f a m o t i o n f o r a change o f v e n u e ' p u r s u a n t t o § 6-3-21.1. Ex p a r t e N a t i o n a l S e c . I n s . Co., 727 So. 2d 788, 789 ( A l a . 1 9 9 8 ) . ... " "'A p a r t y m o v i n g f o r a t r a n s f e r u n d e r § 6-3-21.1 has t h e i n i t i a l b u r d e n o f s h o w i n g , among o t h e r t h i n g s , one o f two f a c t o r s : (1) t h a t t h e t r a n s f e r i s j u s t i f i e d b a s e d on t h e c o n v e n i e n c e o f e i t h e r t h e p a r t i e s o r t h e w i t n e s s e s , o r (2) t h a t t h e t r a n s f e r i s j u s t i f i e d " i n the i n t e r e s t of j u s t i c e . " ' Ex p a r t e I n d i a n a M i l l s & M f g . , I n c . , 10 So. 3d 536, 539 (Ala. 2008) . A l t h o u g h we r e v i e w a r u l i n g on a motion t o t r a n s f e r t o determine whether the t r i a l c o u r t exceeded i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n g r a n t i n g or denying t h e m o t i o n , i d . , where ' t h e c o n v e n i e n c e o f t h e p a r t i e s and w i t n e s s e s o r t h e i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e w o u l d be b e s t s e r v e d by a t r a n s f e r , § 6-3-21.1, A l a . Code 1975, c o m p e l s t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o t r a n s f e r t h e a c t i o n t o t h e a l t e r n a t i v e forum.' Ex p a r t e F i r s t T e n n e s s e e Bank N a t ' l A s s ' n , 994 So. 2d 906, 912 (Ala. 2008) ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) . " Ex p a r t e W a c h o v i a Bank, N.A., 77 So. 3d 570, 573 ( A l a . 2011) . Discussion The p e t i t i o n e r s a r g u e t h a t t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t e x c e e d e d i t s discretion i n denying t h e i r motions to transfer from P e r r y County t o T u s c a l o o s a County. the action Specifically, citing § 6-3-21.1, A l a . Code 1975, w h i c h g o v e r n s when an a c t i o n be t r a n s f e r r e d non t o a n o t h e r venue u n d e r conveniens, they contend that 7 the doctrine must o f forum the i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e 1111598 and 1120080 p r o n g o f t h e f o r u m non to Tuscaloosa c o n v e n i e n s s t a t u t e mandates a t r a n s f e r County. S e c t i o n 6-3-21.1, A l a . Code 1975, provides, in pertinent part: "With respect to civil actions filed in an a p p r o p r i a t e v e n u e , any c o u r t o f g e n e r a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s h a l l , f o r t h e c o n v e n i e n c e o f p a r t i e s and w i t n e s s e s , o r i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e , t r a n s f e r any civil a c t i o n o r any c l a i m i n any c i v i l a c t i o n t o any c o u r t of g e n e r a l j u r i s d i c t i o n i n which the a c t i o n might have b e e n p r o p e r l y f i l e d and t h e c a s e s h a l l p r o c e e d as t h o u g h o r i g i n a l l y f i l e d t h e r e i n . " (Emphasis complaint County. added.) was filed Likewise, The parties i n an they do appropriate not dispute the namely, Perry do n o t d i s p u t e t h a t t h e a c t i o n could p r o p e r l y have b e e n f i l e d i n T u s c a l o o s a venue, that County. 3 However, they W i t h r e g a r d t o venue o f a c t i o n s a g a i n s t i n d i v i d u a l s , 6-3-2, A l a . Code 1975, p r o v i d e s , i n p e r t i n e n t p a r t : 3 "(a) I n p r o c e e d i n g s individuals: of a legal nature against " "(3) A l l o t h e r p e r s o n a l a c t i o n s , i f t h e d e f e n d a n t o r one o f t h e d e f e n d a n t s has w i t h i n t h e s t a t e a p e r m a n e n t r e s i d e n c e , may be commenced in the county of such r e s i d e n c e or i n the county i n which the a c t o r o m i s s i o n c o m p l a i n e d o f may have been done o r may have o c c u r r e d . " 8 § 1111598 and 1120080 do d i s p u t e w h e t h e r t h e i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e p r o n g o f § 6-3-21.1 requires Tuscaloosa a transfer of this case from Perry County to County. " H i s t o r i c a l l y , t h e p l a i n t i f f has had t h e i n i t i a l c h o i c e o f venue u n d e r t h e s y s t e m e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e legislature for determining venue. Before the e n a c t m e n t o f § 6-3-21.1 by t h e A l a b a m a L e g i s l a t u r e i n 1987, a p l a i n t i f f ' s c h o i c e o f venue c o u l d n o t be d i s t u r b e d on t h e b a s i s o f c o n v e n i e n c e t o t h e p a r t i e s or the w i t n e s s e s or i n the i n t e r e s t of j u s t i c e . W i t h t h e a d o p t i o n o f § 6-3-21.1, t r i a l c o u r t s now have 'the power and t h e d u t y t o t r a n s f e r a c a u s e when " t h e i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e " r e q u i r e s a t r a n s f e r . ' Ex p a r t e F i r s t F a m i l y F i n . S e r v s . , I n c . , 718 So. 2d 658, 660 ( A l a . 1998) (emphasis added). In F i r s t F a m i l y , t h i s C o u r t n o t e d t h a t an a r g u m e n t t h a t t r i a l judges have almost unlimited discretion in d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a c a s e s h o u l d be t r a n s f e r r e d u n d e r § 6-3-21.1 'must be c o n s i d e r e d i n l i g h t o f t h e f a c t t h a t the L e g i s l a t u r e used the word " s h a l l " i n s t e a d o f t h e w o r d "may" i n § 6-3-21.1.' 718 So. 2d a t 660. T h i s C o u r t has further held that 'Alabama's forum non conveniens statute is compulsory.' Ex p a r t e Sawyer, 892 So. 2d 898, 905 n.9 ( A l a . 2 0 0 4 ) . " Ex p a r t e A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & C o o l i n g , LLC, (Ala. 58 So. 3d 745, 748-49 2010). "The ' i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e ' p r o n g o f § 6-3-21.1 r e q u i r e s 'the t r a n s f e r o f t h e a c t i o n f r o m a c o u n t y w i t h l i t t l e , i f any, c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e a c t i o n , t o the county w i t h a s t r o n g connection to the a c t i o n . ' Ex p a r t e N a t i o n a l Sec. I n s . Co., 727 So. 2d [788,] 790 [(Ala. 1998)]. T h e r e f o r e , ' i n a n a l y z i n g the i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e p r o n g o f § 6-3-21.1, t h i s C o u r t focuses on w h e t h e r t h e "nexus" or "connection" b e t w e e n t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s a c t i o n and t h e original 9 1111598 and 1120080 f o r u m i s s t r o n g enough t o w a r r a n t b u r d e n i n g t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s forum w i t h the a c t i o n . ' Ex p a r t e F i r s t T e n n e s s e e Bank N a t ' l A s s ' n , 994 So. 2d 906, 911 ( A l a . 2008) . A d d i t i o n a l l y , t h i s C o u r t has h e l d t h a t ' l i t i g a t i o n s h o u l d be h a n d l e d i n t h e f o r u m where t h e i n j u r y o c c u r r e d . ' Ex p a r t e F u l l e r , 955 So. 2d 414, 416 ( A l a . 2 0 0 6 ) . F u r t h e r , i n examining whether i t i s i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e t o t r a n s f e r a c a s e , we c o n s i d e r " t h e b u r d e n o f p i l i n g c o u r t s e r v i c e s and r e s o u r c e s upon t h e p e o p l e o f a c o u n t y t h a t i s n o t a f f e c t e d by t h e c a s e and ... t h e i n t e r e s t o f t h e p e o p l e o f a c o u n t y t o have a c a s e t h a t a r i s e s i n t h e i r county t r i e d c l o s e to p u b l i c view i n t h e i r county." Ex p a r t e S m i t h s W a t e r & Sewer A u t h . , 982 So. 2d 484, 490 ( A l a . 2 0 0 7 ) . " Ex p a r t e I n d i a n a M i l l s & Mfg., I n c . , 10 So. 3d 536, 540 ( A l a . 2008). The p e t i t i o n e r s r e l y p r i m a r i l y on t h i s C o u r t ' s d e c i s i o n s in Ex p a r t e A u t a u g a Wachovia Timber which Bank, N.A., Harvesting, involved Heating & Cooling, s u p r a , and LLC, requests 94 So. for a Ex 3d LLC, s u p r a , Ex p a r t e parte Southeast 371 ( A l a . 2012), change of venue Alabama a l l of under the i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e p r o n g o f t h e f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s s t a t u t e . I n Ex p a r t e A u t a u g a driven by Lori Heating & Cooling, Wright, a resident LLC, of a vehicle being Elmore County, was i n v o l v e d i n an a c c i d e n t i n E l m o r e C o u n t y w i t h a v e h i c l e owned by A u t a u g a place Heating & Cooling, of b u s i n e s s i n Autauga LLC, which County, 10 and had i t s principal driven by Richard 1111598 and 1120080 A l e x a n d e r R o g e r s , a Montgomery r e s i d e n t . Wright sued Rogers and A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & C o o l i n g i n Montgomery C o u n t y , and R o g e r s and A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & C o o l i n g f i l e d a m o t i o n t o t r a n s f e r t h e action t o E l m o r e C o u n t y b a s e d on t h e d o c t r i n e conveniens. After the circuit court denied of forum the non motion, A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & C o o l i n g and R o g e r s p e t i t i o n e d t h i s C o u r t f o r a writ of mandamus, and we issued the writ based on the i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e p r o n g o f t h e f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s s t a t u t e , reasoning, i n part: " A l t h o u g h we a g r e e w i t h W r i g h t t h a t t h e c a s e has a c o n n e c t i o n w i t h Montgomery C o u n t y b e c a u s e R o g e r s is a r e s i d e n t o f Montgomery C o u n t y and A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & A i r may have some b u s i n e s s c o n n e c t i o n s t h e r e , we h o l d t h a t t h e o v e r a l l c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n Montgomery C o u n t y and t h i s c a s e i s weak and t h a t t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e c a s e and E l m o r e C o u n t y i s strong. " F i r s t , the a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d i n Elmore County. Wright, the p l a i n t i f f , i s a r e s i d e n t of Elmore County. F u r t h e r , R e b e c c a M c C u l l e r s , t h e emergency m e d i c a l t e c h n i c i a n who r e s p o n d e d t o t h e a c c i d e n t , testified i n h e r a f f i d a v i t t h a t she w o r k e d f o r Haynes Ambulance o f Wetumpka, I n c . , and t h a t she i s a r e s i d e n t o f E l m o r e C o u n t y . The p r i n c i p a l p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s o f Haynes Ambulance o f Wetumpka, I n c . , i s i n E l m o r e C o u n t y . On t h e o t h e r hand, t h e c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e c a s e and Montgomery C o u n t y , g i v e n t h e e v i d e n c e b e f o r e t h e t r i a l c o u r t , i s weak. Besides the f a c t t h a t R o g e r s i s a r e s i d e n t o f Montgomery C o u n t y , t h e r e was no o t h e r e v i d e n c e b e f o r e t h e t r i a l c o u r t i n d i c a t i n g a c o n n e c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e c a s e and Montgomery C o u n t y . 11 1111598 a n d 1120080 II "The a c c i d e n t u n d e r l y i n g t h i s a c t i o n o c c u r r e d i n E l m o r e C o u n t y , a n d t h e emergency p e r s o n n e l who r e s p o n d e d t o t h e a c c i d e n t were f r o m E l m o r e C o u n t y . The p l a i n t i f f herself i s a r e s i d e n t o f Elmore County. This Court sees no n e e d t o burden Montgomery C o u n t y , w i t h i t s weak c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e c a s e , w i t h an a c t i o n t h a t a r o s e i n E l m o r e C o u n t y s i m p l y because the i n d i v i d u a l defendant r e s i d e s i n Montgomery C o u n t y a n d t h e c o r p o r a t e d e f e n d a n t does some b u s i n e s s t h e r e . We t h u s c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t exceeded i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n denying the p e t i t i o n e r s ' m o t i o n f o r a change o f v e n u e . The t r i a l c o u r t i s hereby d i r e c t e d t o t r a n s f e r t h e case to t h e Elmore C i r c u i t C o u r t . " Ex p a r t e A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & C o o l i n g , L L C , 58 So. 3d a t 750-51. Also, i n Ex p a r t e W a c h o v i a Bank, Tameka F l o y d a n d Adam Lee F l o y d were s i g n a t o r i e s on a b u s i n e s s - c h e c k i n g a c c o u n t i n the name o f Adam Lee F l o y d ("Unique") names Wachovia that Tammy had taken on Image P r o C a r C a r e a t a b r a n c h o f W a c h o v i a Bank i n L e e C o u n t y . discovering Unique," d/b/a U n i q u e Sistrunk, funds from withdrawal s l i p s , "a sometime Unique's employee account by the Floyds i n Macon C o u n t y , where S i s t r u n k sued lived. After of forging Sistrunk and The F l o y d s l a t e r added as a d e f e n d a n t James M. S u t h e r l a n d , an employee o f W a c h o v i a , who a l s o r e s i d e d i n Macon C o u n t y . W a c h o v i a moved t o transfer the i n t e r e s t - o f - justice the action prong t o Lee C o u n t y under o f t h e f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s s t a t u t e , 12 but the 1111598 a n d 1120080 circuit this court Court reasoning, denied for a writ the motion. Wachovia then p e t i t i o n e d o f mandamus, a n d we i s s u e d t h e w r i t , i n part: "Lee C o u n t y i s t h e s i t u s o f a l l t h e a l l e g e d a c t s or omissions g i v i n g r i s e t o t h e p l a i n t i f f s ' c l a i m s . Any a l l e g e d l y unauthorized withdrawals were made from a Wachovia branch i n Lee County. Police i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f t h e m a t t e r was c o n d u c t e d i n L e e County. Lee County i s F l o y d ' s p l a c e o f r e s i d e n c e , as w e l l as t h e l o c a t i o n o f U n i q u e . Thus, L e e C o u n t y i s t h e p l a c e where a l l t h e i n j u r y a l l e g e d i n t h e complaint occurred. Although i t i s not a talisman, the f a c t t h a t t h e i n j u r y o c c u r r e d i n t h e proposed t r a n s f e r e e county i s o f t e n assigned considerable w e i g h t i n an i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e a n a l y s i s . See Ex p a r t e A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & C o o l i n g , L L C , 58 So. 3d 745, 748 ( A l a . 2010) ( ' " [ T ] h i s C o u r t has h e l d that ' l i t i g a t i o n s h o u l d be h a n d l e d i n t h e f o r u m where t h e i n j u r y o c c u r r e d . ' " ' ( q u o t i n g Ex p a r t e I n d i a n a M i l l s [& M f g . , I n c . ] , 10 So. 3d [536,] 540 [(Ala. 2 0 0 8 ) ] ) ) ; Ex p a r t e M c K e n z i e O i l , I n c . , 13 So. 3d 346, 349 ( A l a . 2008) (same). "In short, nothing material to this case t r a n s p i r e d i n Macon C o u n t y . Macon C o u n t y ' s s o l e m a t e r i a l c o n t a c t w i t h t h i s c a s e i s t h a t t h e two individual defendants, S i s t r u n k and S u t h e r l a n d , reside there." 77 So. 3d a t 573-74. Finally, i n Ex p a r t e Southeast Alabama Timber, G a i l W e b s t e r was i n j u r e d i n an a c c i d e n t that was owned b y S o u t h e a s t ("Southeast"), Alabama involving Timber Patricia a vehicle Harvesting, LLC a n d d r i v e n b y one o f i t s e m p l o y e e s , M i c h a e l J . 13 1111598 and Smith. sued 1120080 A l t h o u g h t h e a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d i n Lee C o u n t y , Southeast County, After and the driver of i t s vehicle in Webster Chambers where S o u t h e a s t h a d i t s p r i n c i p a l p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s . the transfer circuit court denied the t h e c a s e t o Lee County, they p e t i t i o n e d f o r a w r i t o f mandamus, and we defendants' motion this to Court i s s u e d the w r i t , reasoning, i n part: "[T]his action was filed i n the county of a defendant's r e s i d e n c e or p r i n c i p a l p l a c e of b u s i n e s s -- Chambers C o u n t y -- a l t h o u g h t h e a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d i n a n o t h e r c o u n t y -- Lee C o u n t y . As t h i s C o u r t has observed: 'Although i t i s not a t a l i s m a n , the f a c t t h a t the i n j u r y o c c u r r e d i n the proposed t r a n s f e r e e c o u n t y i s o f t e n a s s i g n e d c o n s i d e r a b l e w e i g h t i n an interest-of-justice analysis.' Ex p a r t e W a c h o v i a Bank, N.A., 77 So. 3d 570, 573-74 ( A l a . 2011) . A l s o , ... t h e e m e r g e n c y p e r s o n n e l who r e s p o n d e d t o t h e a c c i d e n t i n w h i c h W e b s t e r was i n j u r e d work i n t h e c o u n t y t o w h i c h S o u t h e a s t and S m i t h s e e k t o have the a c t i o n t r a n s f e r r e d . Further, the o n l y nonparty e y e w i t n e s s t o t h e a c c i d e n t l i v e s and w o r k s i n Lee C o u n t y , and W e b s t e r was l i v i n g and w o r k i n g i n Lee County a t the time of the a c c i d e n t . " " T h i s C o u r t has h e l d t h a t t h e ' i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e ' r e q u i r e s t r a n s f e r r i n g an a c t i o n t o a c o u n t y w i t h a s t r o n g c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e c a s e as o p p o s e d t o keeping i t i n a county w i t h an overall weak connection. Chambers C o u n t y ' s s o l e c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e c a s e -- t h a t i t i s t h e p r i n c i p a l p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s o f S o u t h e a s t -- i s weak i n c o m p a r i s o n t o Lee C o u n t y ' s c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e c a s e . 14 1111598 a n d 1120080 " B a s e d on t h e f o r e g o i n g , we c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e c i r c u i t court exceeded i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n denying S o u t h e a s t a n d S m i t h ' s m o t i o n f o r a change o f venue b a s e d on t h e d o c t r i n e o f f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s . We t h e r e f o r e g r a n t S o u t h e a s t and Smith's p e t i t i o n f o r t h e w r i t o f mandamus a n d d i r e c t t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t , i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f j u s t i c e , t o e n t e r an o r d e r t r a n s f e r r i n g t h e c a s e f r o m t h e Chambers C i r c u i t Court t o t h e Lee C i r c u i t Court." Ex p a r t e S o u t h e a s t Based on t h e r e a s o n i n g Cooling, Ex Alabama Timber, Tuscaloosa this case Tuscaloosa A l a b a m a T i m b e r , 94 So. 2d a t 375-77. parte i n Ex p a r t e Wachovia the Bank, Autauga a n d Ex petitioners have parte has P e r r y County; County. the h i t c h that to the claims i n The a c c i d e n t on t h e t o n g u e & Southeast established County has a s t r o n g e r c o n n e c t i o n than Heating occurred i n of the u t i l i t y t r a i l e r Waltman was p u l l i n g h a d b e e n a t t a c h e d t o h i s v e h i c l e by a company i n Tuscaloosa County a c c i d e n t ; a n d Waltman c u r r e n t l y and he was r e s i d i n g and a t the time In County business there contrast, the only Griffin there. Owens C o u n t y have a s t r o n g was argues interest 15 the accident County occurred filed. connection Wood of the resides i n Tuscaloosa a t t h e time the complaint i s that on t h e m o r n i n g has that t h e case has t o P e r r y i t sprincipal the c i t i z e n s place of of Perry i n t h e a f f a i r s o f one o f i t s 1111598 a n d 1120080 resident corporations and the determination of workers' c o m p e n s a t i o n b e n e f i t s owed t o i t s e m p l o y e e s a n d any p o s s i b l e subrogation court rights bifurcated remaining claims of G r i f f i n the workers' those evidence parte benefits Ex p a r t e Griffin and f i l e d Yocum, County. 963 Also, any c l a i m C i t y o f H a l e y v i l l e , 827 So. 2d 778 circuit from the compensation a j u r y w o u l d n o t be Wood h a d p a i d So. 2d 600 the claim the workers' Therefore, i n Perry i n d i c a t i n g that compensation Citing claims However, compensation and o r d e r e d t h a t c l a i m be t r i e d w i t h o u t a j u r y . hearing Wood. for there was no any w o r k e r s ' subrogation. ( A l a . 2007), and Ex ( A l a . 2 0 0 2 ) , Owens a r g u e s t h a t t h e r e a r e numerous d e c i s i o n s t h a t d i d n o t r e q u i r e that an occurred. So. action be tried i n the county However, i n Ex p a r t e where incident S o u t h e a s t Alabama Timber, 3d a t 376, t h i s C o u r t d i s t i n g u i s h e d Ex p a r t e parte the Yocum and Ex H a l e y v i l l e as f o l l o w s : " I n Yocum, t h e p l a i n t i f f , a r e s i d e n t o f D a l l a s County, f i l e d her a c t i o n i n J e f f e r s o n County, the r e s i d e n c e o r p r i n c i p a l p l a c e o f b u s i n e s s o f two o f the defendants. S e v e r a l d e f e n d a n t s who r e s i d e d i n D a l l a s County f i l e d a motion t o t r a n s f e r the a c t i o n t o D a l l a s C o u n t y on t h e b a s i s o f t h e d o c t r i n e o f f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s . The J e f f e r s o n C i r c u i t C o u r t d e n i e d t h e m o t i o n t o t r a n s f e r , and t h i s C o u r t d e n i e d the defendants' subsequent p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t o f mandamus. Unlike this c a s e , Yocum involved a 16 94 1111598 and 1120080 c o n t r a c t dispute i n which the claims against the Jefferson County defendants included fraud, suppression, conversion, and interference with business r e l a t i o n s . This Court concluded that the Jefferson Circuit Court did not exceed its discretion i n denying the motion to transfer ' [ b ] e c a u s e o f t h e n e x u s b e t w e e n J e f f e r s o n C o u n t y and the a l l e g e d p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f t h e two Jefferson County defendants in the alleged scheme to o v e r c h a r g e Cahaba T i m b e r so as t o d e f l a t e i t s p r o f i t s and h e n c e t h e amount due [ t h e p l a i n t i f f ] . ' Ex p a r t e Yocum, 963 So. 2d a t 603. Thus, t h i s C o u r t d e n i e d t h e p e t i t i o n f o r a w r i t o f mandamus s e e k i n g a t r a n s f e r of the case from J e f f e r s o n County not s i m p l y b e c a u s e two o f t h e d e f e n d a n t s r e s i d e d o r h a d a p r i n c i p a l p l a c e of b u s i n e s s i n J e f f e r s o n County, but because Jefferson County had a s u b s t a n t i a l connection to the matters g i v i n g r i s e to the a c t i o n . [Two o f t h e a l l e g e d p r i n c i p a l w r o n g d o e r s o p e r a t e d out of J e f f e r s o n County.] " H a l e y v i l l e i n v o l v e d an a c t i o n f i l e d i n M a r i o n C o u n t y by a p l a i n t i f f who f e l l a t t h e Downtown M a l l of H a l e y v i l l e , which i s l o c a t e d i n Winston County. The d e f e n d a n t , t h e C i t y o f H a l e y v i l l e , f i l e d a m o t i o n f o r a change o f venue t o W i n s t o n C o u n t y b a s e d on § 6-3-11, A l a . Code 1975, the s t a t u t e that c o n t r o l s venue f o r c i v i l actions filed against municipalities. Webster argues t h a t i n H a l e y v i l l e 'the t r i a l c o u r t and t h i s C o u r t d i d n o t f e e l t h a t the i n t e r e s t of j u s t i c e r e q u i r e d t h a t the p l a i n t i f f must p r o s e c u t e h e r c a s e i n t h e c o u n t y where she f e l l r a t h e r than her chosen forum.' W e b s t e r ' s b r i e f , p. 10. In f a c t , t h i s Court d i d not address the i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e f a c t o r i n H a l e y v i l l e because the d e f e n d a n t ' s m o t i o n t o t r a n s f e r t h e c a s e was not b a s e d upon t h e d o c t r i n e o f f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s . The C i t y o f H a l e y v i l l e c o n t e n d e d t h a t venue was improper i n M a r i o n County, not t h a t Winston County was a more a p p r o p r i a t e o r more c o n v e n i e n t f o r u m . Therefore, H a l e y v i l l e p r o v i d e s no support for Webster's p o s i t i o n . " 17 1111598 a n d 1120080 Finally, although Owens makes reference to Perry County's t i m b e r i n d u s t r y a n d c i t e s Ex p a r t e S i e m a g , 53 So. 3d 974 ( A l a . Civ. App. 2 0 1 0 ) , t o compare t h a t i n d u s t r y t o t h e c o a l - m i n i n g i n d u s t r y i n W a l k e r C o u n t y , he d i d n o t p r e s e n t a n y e v i d e n c e t o the c i r c u i t court t o support h i sallegations regarding Perry County's timber i n d u s t r y . " ' " I n c o n s i d e r i n g a mandamus p e t i t i o n , we must l o o k a t o n l y t h o s e f a c t s b e f o r e t h e t r i a l c o u r t . " Ex p a r t e A m e r i c a n R e s . I n s . Co., 663 So. 2d 932, 936 ( A l a . 1995) ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) . Of c o u r s e , f a c t s must be b a s e d upon " e v i d e n t i a r y m a t e r i a l , " w h i c h does n o t i n c l u d e s t a t e m e n t s o f c o u n s e l i n motions, b r i e f s , and arguments. Ex p a r t e M c C o r d - B a u g h , 894 So. 2d 679, 686 ( A l a . 2004). See a l s o P r o v i d i a n N a t ' l Bank v. C o n n e r , 898 So. 2d 714, 719 ( A l a . 2 0 0 4 ) . ' "Ex p a r t e ADT S e c . S e r v s . , I n c . , 933 So. 2d 343, 345 ( A l a . 2006) . See a l s o Ex p a r t e V e r b e n a U n i t e d M e t h o d i s t C h u r c h , 953 So. 2d 395, 399 ( A l a . 2 0 0 6 ) . Because t h e i n f o r m a t i o n b e f o r e t h i s Court r e g a r d i n g Wright's a s s e r t i o n s i s c o n t a i n e d i n 'statements o f counsel i n motions, briefs, and arguments,' i t c a n n o t be c o n s i d e r e d ' e v i d e n t i a r y m a t e r i a l ' a n d t h u s w i l l n o t be c o n s i d e r e d b y t h i s C o u r t . " Ex p a r t e A u t a u g a H e a t i n g & C o o l i n g , L L C , 58 So. 3d a t 749-50. T h e r e f o r e , we have n o t c o n s i d e r e d t h o s e presence a s s e r t i o n s about t h e o f t h e timber b u s i n e s s i n P e r r y County i n d e t e r m i n i n g P e r r y County's connection to this 18 case. 1111598 a n d 1120080 Because connection stronger Perry County to the claims connection has only a and T u s c a l o o s a to the claims, very weak County overall h a s a much the i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e p r o n g o f t h e f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s s t a t u t e r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e a c t i o n be t r a n s f e r r e d t o T u s c a l o o s a County. Conclusion For the above-stated reasons, we conclude that the c i r c u i t c o u r t e x c e e d e d i t s d i s c r e t i o n i n d e n y i n g Waltman's a n d Progressive's motions f o r a change o f venue based on t h e i n t e r e s t - o f - j u s t i c e p r o n g o f t h e f o r u m non c o n v e n i e n s s t a t u t e . Accordingly, for we g r a n t Waltman's a n d P r o g r e s s i v e ' s petitions t h e w r i t o f mandamus a n d d i r e c t t h e c i r c u i t c o u r t , i n t h e interest of justice, t o e n t e r an o r d e r t r a n s f e r r i n g t h e c a s e from t h e P e r r y C i r c u i t Court t o t h e Tuscaloosa Circuit 1111598 -- PETITION GRANTED; WRIT ISSUED. 1120080 -- PETITION GRANTED; WRIT ISSUED. Malone, C . J . , and S t u a r t and P a r k e r , Shaw, J . , c o n c u r s i n the result. 19 J J . , concur. Court.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
