RUTH B. JOHNS, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA FARM BUREAU, ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
Ruth Johns appealed a venue change from Orange County to Hardee County in her lawsuit against Florida Farm Bureau and her estranged husband James Johns for wrongful conversion and insurance mishandling. The Fifth District Court reversed, holding that the plaintiff and individual defendant's implicit agreement on venue, combined with the corporate defendant's presence in Orange County and Orange County's geographic convenience, supported maintaining venue in Orange County.
The court held that the trial judge abused his discretion in changing venue. When plaintiff and an individual defendant agree on a specific venue and a corporate co-defendant has an agent in that county, venue should remain there. Additionally, Orange County was forum conveniens as the midpoint between Alachua and Hardee counties where evidence and witnesses were located.
[1] Venue may be proper in a county where a corporate defendant has an agent, even if an individual defendant resides in another county, if the plaintiff and individual defen…
[2] When determining venue, courts must consider where the cause of action arose, where witnesses reside, and where documentary evidence is located.
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“if the plaintiff and an individual defendant agree upon a specific venue, explicitly or implicitly, and the corporate co-defendant has an agent in the county where the suit is brought then venue should remain there”
Establishes the primary rule governing venue when multiple defendants exist and there is agreement between plaintiff and an individual defendant
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRuth Johns sued Florida Farm Bureau General Insurance Company and her estranged husband James B. Johns for wrongful conversion of insurance funds and …
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Waiver Of Venue cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from an order changing venue from Orange to Hardee County.
Appellant sued Florida Farm Bureau General Insurance Company and James B. Johns. Appellee Johns, appellant’s estranged husband, is alleged to have wrongfully converted funds from checks written by appellee Florida Farm Bureau. The insurance company is alleged to have owed both Ruth and James Johns money for fire damage to jointly owned property, to have wrongfully paid James and failed to pay appellant. James B. Johns lives in Hardee County and Farm Bureau has offices in both Hardee and Orange counties.
James B. Johns answered the complaint and did not seek a venue change. He has waived a change of venue, if he was entitled to a change.
We believe Sage v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Hartford, 239 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970) is on point and good law. Sage holds that if the plaintiff and an individual defendant agree upon a specific venue, explicitly or implicitly, and the corporate co-defendant has an agent in the county where the suit is brought then venue should remain there.
However, that is not the end of it; where the cause of action arose, where the witnesses reside and where the documentary evidence is located are all relevant questions when deciding the proper venue to try the lawsuit. The most convenient place, forum conveniens, is the most important factor to consider when venue is challenged. See Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Young, 690 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
The facts of this case to be considered are as follows. The Farm Bureau checks were made payable to both Johns and were drawn upon an Alachua County bank. The checks show an address for Farm Bureau in Gainesville, Florida, which is in Alachua County. It is alleged that appellee Johns deposited the checks, without endorsements, in his account in Hardee County. They went, of course, through banking channels to be paid by the bank in Alachua County. After his depositing the checks, Johns obtained the money from the Hardee County bank and converted them to his own use or benefit. In order to prove a case against appellee Farm Bureau, if she can, it will be necessary that witnesses and documents be obtained from Farm Bureau in Alachua County, the bank in Alachua County, the bank or banks in Hardee County, appellee Johns in Hardee County and perhaps his daughter (who was a co-owner of one of the accounts he used) in some county. Thus, there is no particular county which is most convenient in all respects. In fact, Orange County, where the suit was brought, where the appellant and individual defendant have settled upon, and where appellant’s attorney resides is probably the most convenient because that county is about half-way between Alachua and Hardee.
Following Sage and being convinced in addition that Orange County is not a forum non conveniens, we must determine the trial judge abused his discretion in changing the venue of this lawsuit. The order is quashed.
QUASHED.
PETERSON, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Young, 690 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Fowler v. State of N.J. State Parole Bd., 239 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)
- Sage v. Travelers Indem. Co. OF Hartford, 239 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)