Legal Document

376 U.S. 612 84 Supreme Court Reporter 805 11 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 945 Hon. Francis L. VAN DUSEN, District Judge, etc., et al., Petitioners,v.Roberta BARRACK, Administratrix, al. (two cases). Nos. 56, 80. Argued Jan. 8 and 9, 1964. Decided March 30, Owen baron Rhoads, Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioners in Number 56. Morton Hollander, Washington, D.C., John R. McConnell, Pa, respondents both cases. Mr. Justice GOLDBERG delivered the opinion of Court. 1 This case involves construction application § 1404(a) Judicial Code 1948. Section 1404(a), which allows a 'change venue' within federal judicial system, provides that: 'For convenience parties witnesses, interest justice, district court may transfer any civil action to other or division where it might have been brought.' 28 KF62 1404(a). 2 The facts, need but brief statement here, reveal that disputed change venue is set against background an alleged mass tort. On October 4, 1960, shortly after departing from Boston airport, commercial airliner, scheduled fly plunged into Harbor. As result crash, over 150 actions personal injury wrongful death instituted airline, various manufacturers, States, and, some cases, Massachusetts Port Authority. In most these plaintiffs crash resulted defendants' negligence permitting aircraft's engines ingest birds. More than 100 were brought Massachusetts, more 45 Eastern Pennsylvania. 3 present concerns 40 Pennsylvania by representatives victims crash.1 defendants, this Court, moved under was witnesses resided are pending. granted motion, holding justified regardless whether transferred would be governed laws choice-of-law rules Massachusetts. 204 F.Supp. 426. also specifically held not precluded fact had qualified law sue as decedents. plaintiffs, sought writ mandamus Appeals successfully contended erred should vacate its order transfer. 309 Federal Reporter, 2nd 953. could only if at time suits brought, State transferee relied part upon interpretation Rule 17(b) Rules Civil Procedure.2 4 We certiorari review important questions concerning operation 372 964, 83 1088, 10 128. For reasons stated below, we hold judgment must reversed, their fundamental assumptions regarding state applied accordingly remanded Court.3 5 I. WHERE THE ACTION 'MIGHT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT.' 6 reflects increased desire tried system place called particular considerations justice.4 Thus, recognized Continental Grain company versus Barge F.B.L.—585, 364 19, 26, 27, 80 1470, 1474, 1475, 1540, purpose section prevent waste 'of time, energy money' 'to protect litigants, public unnecessary inconvenience expense * *.' To end empowers 'any action'5 another warranted promotes justice. power is, however, expressly limited final clause restricting those districts 'might Although bring suit (the transferor court), ruled motion denied because forum) complainants obtained appointments requisite initiate such forum). At outset, therefore, consider incapacity they commenced forum renders latter impermissible 'might-have-been-brought' limitation. 7 There no question propriety either jurisdiction proposed forum.6 conceded 'quite likely' ancillary appointment legally irrelevant. F.2d, 957—958. concluding granted, Hoffman Blaski, 363 335, 1084, 1254, establishing 'unless plaintiff unqualified right he filed his original complaint, authorized 1404(a).' 957. (Emphasis original.) found analogy Hoffman, particularly persuasive 'perceive basis logic policy making distinction between absence prospective plaintiff's lack capacity there.' Ibid. addition, 'Rule Fed.R.Civ.P., requires refer sits determine sue.'7 Id., 958. defendants contend phrase 1404(a)—'where brought'—refers Congress has provided statutes 'may Applying criterion, argue posture They supra, did rule limitations relevant determining brought' requirement prohibited lacked command when originally instituted. further decision below contrary underlying since effectively enables plaintiff, simply failing proceed potential forums qualify representative, restrict frustrate efforts far convenient appropriate. Finally, with regard conclusion precludes transfer, effect Rule, like existence different forum, determination where, indicated laws, conclude state-law defenses instead considered assessed reference criterion 'in justice.' See infra, Pages 624—626, 640—643. 9 respond emphasizing 'Pennsylvania fiduciaries representing estates decedents.' related would, law, constitute 'an absolute defense.' Blaski established unless, complaint independent institute defendant seeking implicitly agree waive available State. even limiting 'where - relates fiduciary shall determined 'by held.' understand language rather court. 'were held), brought." Atlantic first nature limitation imposed words opposed defendant's on ground 'venue ability *' defendant.8 U.S., 337, 1086, 1254. question, 'whether properly empowered action, defendant, it.' 336, 1085, emphasized 'venue, person, waived.' 343, 1089, that, despite waivers consent, improper service process brought.'9 concluded 'independent' 'unqualified' forum.10 turns, validity assumption 'where-it-might-have-been-brought' refers forum. It noted instant case, unlike proper. difference plainly demonstrates extended restrictions transfers forums. issue here presented because, otherwise frustrated prejudiced pursuing action. 12 cannot intended availability referring rules, sue, Several compel conclusion. First, entity perused plain meaning, seems clear obvious referents immediate statutory context.11 enacted Chapter 87 Part IV That designated 'District Courts; Venue.' itself dealing generally 'Jurisdiction Chapter, includes §§ 1391—1406, recurs least times12 prosecuted' times.13 context thus evidence similar wording directly 13 Secondly, asked purposes warrant broad generous clause. answer, think, quite evident. MR. JUSTICE BLACK said, speaking Barge, 1540. 'The idea behind 'civil action' vindicate wrong—how ver court—presents issues make one another, trial judge can, findings, whole court.' remedial individualized, case-by-case consideration fairness—militates number permissible system.14 valid reason reading narrow range beyond permitted which, all, generalized attempts promote same goals fairness. 14 construing suggested discriminatorily enable means own acts omissions, proper having joined single rem personam damage claims, claim forum.15 approving order, observed failure adopt 'common-sense approach practically scuttle non conveniens statute so admiralty concerned. All do escape entirely owner ship, done here.' 24—25, bar presents situation. Appeals' grant bringing wrongful-death unilaterally reduce refraining qualifying wished litigate. extent graphically illustrated American jurisdictions, vast majority require condition suit, foreign executor representative obtain perform preliminary act.16 possibilities facts amply demonstrate construed who defeating deliberate proper, just. defeat derive rights privileges conferred conduct party favoring inconvenient 15 summary, then, delimiting suit. 16 Appeals, reversing Procedure. portion sued held.'17 our view does raises separate question. not, establish 17(b), interpreted preclude requested reliance placed necessarily assumes language—which free ambiguity—requires court.18 assumption, entitled raise defense thereby actions. Thus prejudicial applicable law. possibility makes apparent, although irrelevant brought,' render 'interest 17 whether, present, accompanied law.19 Whenever significantly differs State—whether limitations, 'substantive' liability—it becomes necessary what bearing venue, 'the underlies problem differing basic first, insofar relevant, relationship 18 II. 'THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE': EFFECT A CHANGE VENUE UPON APPLICABLE STATE LAW. 19 ordered likelihood highly prejudice flow governing sue. Indeed, emphasize 'ultimate move recoveries restricted sharply punitive damages compensation loss suffered.'20 argued substantially courts sitting held, t ansferee differ ruling assumed though seriously legal claim. If valid, argue, precluded—regardless considerations—as justice' exercised privilege statutes, cases removed 20 conflict laid aside, court) recovery death. Death Act negligently causes 'shall liable sum less two thousand nor twenty dollars, degree culpability Mass.Ann. Laws, chapter 229, (Supp.1961). By contrast, (1) based common principle losses tortfeasor's (2) $20,000.21 Some urge, differences courts, applying choice entirety, including limitation.22 follows Pennsylvania, referring, required Klaxon Stentor Elec. Mfg. Co., Inc., 313 487, 61 1020, 85 L.Ed. 1477, therefore substantive there. argument highlights frequently cuase arose conflict-of-laws often forum.23 point New York Kilberg Northeast Airlines, N.Y.2d 34, 211 N.Y.S.2d 133, 172 North 526, Second Circuit Pearson 553, 92 Law Reports, 1162, cert. denied, 912, 726, 720, indicating light policies, apply aspects statute. ordering transferred, undesirable accept while denying enforcement measure recovery.24 F.Supp., 433—436. resolve yet pending soon opportunity so. being event trial, reasoned forthwith postpone considerati n until later decisions well supplied useful guidance. Fundamentally, transferring significant 21 plaintiffs' illustrate difficulties arise contentions concern relating damages, shorter refuse adjudicate actionable tantamount dismiss.25 light, merits meaning Pennsylvania's rules. enough substantial 22 lower taken whole, strongly inclined risk laws.26 utilized variety doctrines approve desirable plaintiffs,27 th prevailing adopted Tenth 1950, years enactment Headrick Atchison, T. & S.F.R. 182 305, developed recent Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Green MacMahon, 312 650. These general interpretative believe faithfully 23 Missouri citizen, injured accident California. He responsibility lay railroad, Kansas corporation doing business States. attorney entered settlement negotiations 'these continued barred California; (and) thereafter advised rely 307. thereupon Mexico, amenable virtue longer barred. then Mexico diversity. dismissal 'or alternative cause California, Northern Division, pursuant 'that California run, had, futile unavailing.' 308. observing plaintiff: 24 'had select contention made Had court, procedural applicable. (I)n removal policy.' 309. 25 From followed, concluded, 26 'Upon remain controlled state, interests there logical why still state.' 309—310. 27 following usually involved equally State, affect outcome litigation. Securities Exchange Southern amend add common-law arising Without Alabama objected unfavorable (which plaintiff) join claim.' 652. rejected contentions: 'Although matter whatever acquired unaffected. all respects location. S.F. Ry. 305 652—653. 29 import declaring secondly, amended, 'will (including rules).' 654. 30 Of course allow retain advantages initially selected. nothing, justify use accruing chosen inconvenient, venue. provisions compared 1406(a).28 sections broadly designed dismissal, 1406(a) wrongly improperly laid, whereas, operates premises privilege.29 underlines Congress, passing primarily concerned problems selection, one.30 31 considering Code, aware mitigate abuses stemming provisions. provision Employers' Liability subject special concern.31 However, pending, Jennings bill Ex parte Collett, 337 55, 64, 69 944, 949, 93 1207, 'was drastic 1404(a),' 'would large repealed section) Act' severely forums.32 legislative supports accrue exercise counteract inconveniences flowed history certainly startling 'get bonus venue.'33 accepting go offing, forum-shopping instrument.34 And, importantly, reluctant transfers, convenience, conceivably selected forum.35 believe, indicate regarded housekeeping measure, placement litigation intended, fairness, authorize courtrooms.36 32 deal congressional apportioning fully accords supported Erie Tompkins, 304 58 817, 82 1188. formulated doctrine stating establishes uniformity state,' 496, 1022, diversity citizenship states sit,' Griffin McCoach, 498, 503, 1023, 1025, 1481.37 superficial formulations suggest Such reading, contradicts quoted express. said Guaranty Trust York, 326 99, 109, 65 1464, 89 2079: 33 'Erie Tompkins endeavor formulate scientific terminology. expressed touches vitally distribution courts. nub transaction non-resident litigant block away, lead result.' 34 analysis ensure 'accident' utilize achieve achieved filed. defeated nonresident subjected (Pennsylvania), invoke gain benefits (Massachusetts). What identity courts;38 instances directing sit' obscure reasoning critical maintained decides filed.39 35 conclude, seek obligated be, respect courtrooms.40 36 We, reject result. ruling, transferor, transferee, State.41 attempt example, govern 1404(a)42 dismissed conveniens.43 37 foregoing Procedure indicated, 619, qualifications 'capacity held.'44 correct assuming referred 38 arguing suggests controlling fiduciaries. jurisdictions permit locally safeguards needed local citizens purporting represent decedent persons caused irresponsible out-of-state fiduciaries.' support 17(b).45 (Pennsylvania). jurisdiction, will equitably protected ironic receive inadequate protection 'foreign' 39 think Rule's held' terms requiring sit.'46 637—639. assumes,47 incorrectly held'—carries governs involving remembered, phrase, express doctrine, employed long before system.48 work accommodation interpreting new contexts look guiding keep 'free entanglements analytical terminological niceties.' Cf. 110, S.Ct., 2079. Since similarly Where essentially courtrooms, 17(b)to corresponding manner source laws. misconceived denial 41 III. LAW: ON CONVENIENCE PARTIES AND WITNESSES. 42 alter dispose can measured criteria Though answer follow automatically carry them transferor's nevertheless more—or less—practical desirable. matters weighed assessing fairness pervasively shaped contours obviously irrelevant, heard, vital, on. Not given bear familiarity relative ease practicality trying 43 applied. finding sufficiently fair reassess discretion exercised. State's applied, overlooked adequately several factors relevance apparent continue apply. 44 desirability affected decided recognize statute's note facilitate consolidation now result, full 431—432. Since, already feasibility therefrom altered. Moreover, provisions, find relatively greater compensatory testify economic suffered individuals. possible dependent conveniently located 'There appropriateness home untangle itself.' Gulf Oil Corporation Gilbert, 330 501, 509, 67 839, 843, 91 1055. difficult unclear defer advantageous judges possess ready If, hand, weight differently. Consolidation freed rendered residing reduced. course, familiar 46 pointing considerations, unsettled, questions, near future provide guidance.49 uncertainty, factor likely prove inconvenient. elements uncertainty alone transfer; factor, among others, 47 singled out above suggesting importance actually improper. ignored certain clearly appraised decide appropriate, reverse remand reconsider 48 Accordingly, Third reversed proceedings conformity opinion. 49 Reversed remanded. 50 concurs reversal forth believes circumstances shown opinion, error Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., U.S.C.: 'Capacity Sue Be Sued. individual, acting capacity, domicile. organized. c urt except partnership unincorporated association, name enforcing existing Constitution receiver appointed Title 28, U.S.C., 754 959(a).' Government, urges remedy. Government concedes, reviewed through power. Norwood Kirkpatrick, 349 29, 75 544, 99 789; 1207. advanced Government. Platt Minnesota Mining 240, 769. See, e.g., 32, 546, 789: 'When just codify conveniens. writing section, revising codifying.' Moore, Practice (2d ed., 1961), 1751—1758. National City Lines, 78, 955, 1226 (interpreting include special, general, provisions). 426, 437. Nor Harbor 'already due 427, n. 1. counsel 'must eventually improper.' 953, contested ibid., case. notes 11, infra. text 2, supra. sub nom. exist respective districts, reach courts.' 341, Two weeks 622. cargo owner, barge barge. Orleans. barge, res, plaintiff-cargo Memphis Orleans brought. rejecting argument, claims viewed complainant way Comment, U. Chi.L.Rev. 373 (1964). Felchlin Smelting Refining 136 577 (D.C.S.D.Cal.1955). Note, 60 Yale L.J. 183 (1951). analogous 1406(a), shares context, contain phrase: laying wrong dismiss, 1406(a). added.) Goldlawr, Heiman, 369 463, 913, 39; Hart Wechsler, Courts System (1953), Page 979; 735 (1963). 1391(a)(b), 1392(a)(b), 1393(b), 1395(d), 1396, 1397, 1399, 1400(b). 1394, 1395(a)(b)(c)(e), 1401, 1402(a)(b). Other as: sued,' 1391(d); 1393(a); 1398, 1403; instituted,' 1400(a). 76 Harv.L.Rev. 1679, 1680 Rutgers L.Rev. 664, 668 (1963); 52 1048. implications subsequent decisions, Goranson Capital 221 820 (D.C.E.D.Va.), Thompson 220 140 (D.C.S.D.N.Y.). rationale (relied 957). (Court Appeals') foray never undertaken confident treat qualification forum.' 1681 Similarly, 'there venue-jurisdiction adequate host defensive bars foreseeably dismissal.' 666 cf. 51 Col.L.Rev. 762, 771 Cavers, Change Choice-of-Law Thinking Its Bearing Problem, A.L.I., Study Division Jurisdiction (Tent. Draft 1, 1963), 154, 193. Bonding insurance 352 128, 77 186, 189, Tort Claims principles Act. Only 'award deaths.' 130—131, 188, 189. stated: assessment tort-feasor, amount pecuniary next kin, nature. standard liability punitive—i.e., 'with degree' culpability—not compensatory. nothing measures 'pecuniary injuries." 129, 132, 187, E.g., Beatty Fox, 328 Mass. 216, 102 781; Macchiaroli Howell, 294 144, 200 Northeastern KF135 N59 905; Boott Mills M.R.R., 218 582, 106 680; Bagley Small, N.H. 107, 23. Compare Purdon's Pa.Stat.Ann. 1601—1604; Spangler Helm's York-Pittsburgh Motor Express, 396 Pa. 482, 153 490; Thirteenth Fifteenth Street Passenger Boudrou, 475, 481—482. Kloeb, Cir., 308 655. Blume, Place Trial Cases, Mich.L.Rev. (1949). Full Faith Credit Clause intimate contention. 64 1347, 1354—1355 (1951), changes concludes 'To purely without verdict examining them.' 650; Benton Vinson, Elkins, Weems Searls, 255 299; 305. also, King Bros. Productions, RKO Teleradio Pictures, 209 271; Gomez Dorothy, 499; Hargrove Louisville N.R. 681; Heaton 119 658; Frechoux Lykes S.S. 118 234; Greve Gibraltar Enterprises, 410; Curry Marine Delaware, 234. But 655 (transfer identical); (see 18, supra); supra stipulate apply). authorities cited, 39, Frequently transfer-on-condition estoppel plaintiff. supra; Crawford Shirley Lykes, 148 958; May Steel Navigator, 152 254; Hokanson Helene Curtis Industries, 177 701. Viaggio Field, 643, 648, 'converse situation (under 1406(a)) asking hopes advantage state's of) limitations.' Skilling Funk Aircraft 173 939; 902, 914 (1961); 735, 745, 68 1962 Wis.L.Rev. 342, . 466—467, 915—916, 39. 6, 507, 842, 1055: resist imposition letter drawn generality give sure pursue remedy.' Revisor's Note drafted accordance conveniens, example provision, see Baltimore Ohio Kepner, 1941, 62 314 44, 86 prosecuted Employer's occurred employee Ohio. subsection further, justice so.' Revision Report House Committee Laws H.R. 7124, 79th Cong., Sess., A127. 68—69, 951—952, 1207; (note Commentary (1949), 206. 60, 947, observed: 'Section defines forum; deals distinct problems. limit modify elsewhere cular district. An federal, previously.' Jackson, dissenting Wells Simonds Abrasive 345 514, 522, 73 856, 860, 97 1211, dismay suggestion: 'Are get venue? sole test burden proof, contributory negligence, admission evidence, doctrines, shopping favorable via (transfer) route opens up conflict, confusion injustice anything Swift Tyson, Pet. 865, ever Currie, Venue Conflict 405, 441 (1955): 'If thumb sits, every become game chess, authorizing knight's move; land square color.' 1355 (1951): 'It seem best, materially proposals, 1306, 1307, 1308. commentary 1306 seeks bound benefit traditionally selection thought let reap sense so, alternatives undesirable. control, exercising decisive Whether appropriate letting fall may, 'just' rule, unfortunate. 66. 108, 1469, 2079 ('a adjudicating state-created solely purpose, effect, *'). 'Whatever doctrine) produce attributable leaves limits Constitution, policies diverging neighbors.' 36, 26—27, 1772—1777; 410—413, 438—439 (1955); Laws: Retraction, 341 (1960); 537 Kaufman, Observations Transfers F.R.D. 595, 601 (1951); 1354 Cornell L.Q. 459, 462, 464 (1950). dispatch constitutional limitations. Wat Employers Assurance Corp., Ltd., 348 66, 166, 74; Hughes Fetter, 609, 71 980, 95 1212; Pacific Industrial Accident Comm'n, 306 493, 59 629, 940; Alaska Packers Assn. 532, 55 518, 79 1044; Home Dick, 281 397, 338, 74 926. Chi.L.Rev., 537, 539—541 Parsons Chesapeake O.R. 375 71, 185, 137, Act, per curiam 'a prior serve divest discretionary vested him 73—74, 137. 'That known presume states.' consistent 'state policy' whe misleading 'alter' policy. contrary, therein representatives, 'altered' lost status representatives. 1030, 1037—1041 577, 581—582 supra). transmitted December 20, 1937. 649, 685. 435 20. April 1962. allege decision, Griffith Air Incorporated (Pa.C.P., Phila.Cty., June Term, 1962, 2013), indicates entirety.

Classification Label: 8