Venue: USC 1391 1391: BASIC PROVISIONS - 1391(a) governs cases founded solely on diversity - 1391(b) governs non-diversity

ity cases (including FQ) (Note: the first two subsections of each are identical) First: 1391(a/b)(1)-- Do all defendants reside in the same state? Individuals are residents where they are domiciled Corporations, under 1391(c), are residents in districts where they are subject to PJ. o For multi district states, they are residents only of districts where they would be subject to PJ, were the district a separate state. o If there is no such district, they are residents of district where it has the most significant contacts. - If all Ds reside in the same state, venue is proper in a district where any of the Ds reside. Go to 1391(a/b)(2) to see if there is another viable alternative venue. Second: 1391(a/b)(2)Is there a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim took place or where property that is the subject of the action located? If yes, venue is proper in that district If no (and the answer to the first test was no), go to fallback1391(a/b)(3). Third: Fallback provisiononly if no proper venue can be found under (1) and (2). In case is based solely on diversity1391(a)(3) o Venue is proper in a district where any defendant is subject to PJ at the time the action is commenced Non Diversity cases1391 (b)(3) o Venue is proper in a district where any defendant can be found.

Corporate Defendants: 1391(c) - Same process as above. - 1391(c) governs where a corporation resides Important because (a)(1) and (b)(1) depend on Ds residence. - Corporations are residents in districts where they are subject to PJ For multi district states, corporations are residents only in those districts where they would be subject to PJ were the district a separate state. If there is no such district, corporations reside in the district where they have the most significant contacts

B. TRANSFER: USC 1404 and 1406

Courts may only transfer within the same judicial system: Federal court can transfer to any other federal court BUT -- state courts cannot transfer to another states court (each states court is its own judicial system) 1404: WHEN VENUE IS INITIALLY PROPER

Enacted in response to Gilbert v. Gulf Oil (forum non conveniens case) Gulf Oil provided factors that a judge should consider when deciding whether to dismiss for forum non-conveniens. o They are also considered when deciding whether to transfer. Private interest factors: compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, location of events giving rise to the case, the ability to take a view of the premises involved in the dispute, location of relevant witnesses and documentary evidence, and enforceability of judgment. Public interest factors: whether the dispute involves local people or events, whether the dispute is likely to be decided under local law, whether there will be a right to a jury, administrative difficulties from courts perspective, public need. 1404(a): For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought. Policy: because federal district courts are all units of the same system, Congress has the authority to provide for transfer of cases among them to promote efficiency. might have been broughtcase can only be transferred to a district where it could have been filed originally, that is, one that would be a proper venue and where the defendants would be subject to personal jurisdiction for the claim.

(Transferee must be a proper venue AND have PJ over the D)

1406: WHEN VENUE IS INITIALLY IMPROPER First check to see if venue is initially proper under 1391. If not, look to 1406. Court may dismiss OR transfer (by considering the Gulf Oil factors) 1406(a): The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such a case to any district or division in which it could have been brought. Note: o Gives the court the authority to dismiss rather than transfer o Allows the judge to transfer even though the case is not properly before him (because of improper venue) o Limits the districts to which the case can be transferred (district where it could have been brought) The meaning of could have been brought in 1406 is the same as the meaning of might have been brought in 1404. (Proper venue and PJ over the D). TRANSFER: WHAT LAW APPLIES?

VanDusen v. Barrack: In a diversity suit, the transferee forum is required to apply the law of the transferor court, regardless of who initiates the transfer.