Case Name: McKENZIE TANK LINES, INC., Appellant, v. Nestor VALDES, et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1993-11-09
Citations: 625 So. 2d 1330
Docket Number: No. 93-1550
Parties: McKENZIE TANK LINES, INC., Appellant, v. Nestor VALDES, et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before JORGENSON, LEVY and GERSTEN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 625
Pages: 1330–1330

Head Matter:
McKENZIE TANK LINES, INC., Appellant, v. Nestor VALDES, et al., Appellees.
No. 93-1550.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Nov. 9, 1993.
Marlow, Connell, Valerius, Abrams, Lowe and Adler, and John C. Mullin, Jr., and William G. Liston, Miami, for appellant.
Greenberg, Traurig, Hoffman, Lipoff, Ro-sen & Quentel, and Raquel A. Rodriguez, Miami, for appellees.
Before JORGENSON, LEVY and GERSTEN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, McKenzie Tank Lines, Inc., appeals a non-final order denying a motion to transfer venue. We affirm.
It is well settled that the trial court's determination on venue is presumptively correct. Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. v. Ray, 418 So.2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), review denied sub nom., B.F. Goodrich v. Ray, 427 So.2d 736 (Fla.1983); Taylor v. Dasilva, 401 So.2d 1161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). In close cases, the appellate court should defer to the judgment of the trial court. Hu v. Crockett, 426 So .2d 1275, 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).
When venue is proper in more than one county, it is the plaintiffs choice where to file suit. Houchins v. Florida East Coast Ry., 388 So.2d 1287, 1289 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The trial court's ruling should not be disturbed absent a showing of substantial inconvenience or the likelihood of injustice. Taylor, 401 So.2d at 1162.
Appellant has not established either a showing of substantial inconvenience or the likelihood of injustice by the trial court's denial of the motion to change venue. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's order.
Affirmed.