04/12/2007
Maine plaintiff tries to dodge federal court by taking claims to Texas
CONTACT: Melissa Sharp, (202) 314-2068
Washington, D.C.--In an audacious attempt to avoid the federal court system, a plaintiff from Maine is seeking to ignore established venue laws and is trying to shop around for the most favorable court in the country to hear his asbestos case.
Last November, a trial court in Texas misinterpreted the state's venue laws and ruled to permit this case to be heard, despite the fact that all of the claims in the case arose in Maine. If allowed to stand, the order could result in a flood of nonresident cases being brought into Texas. This could place a heavy burden on small businesses that stand to be dragged into Texas to defend claims brought against them in court.
In order to protect small businesses from this injustice, the National Federation of Independent Business Legal Foundation filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court of Texas urging the court to vacate the trial court's decision. NFIB argues that the case should be dismissed so that the claims can be filed in the proper venue, a Maine court.
"Small-business owners don't have attorneys on staff to send to Texas anytime someone decides to file a claim against their business," said Karen Harned, executive director of NFIB's Legal Foundation. "This case demonstrates exactly why the judiciary branch has established venue laws. The Texas Legislature, in passing the state's venue statute, made it mandatory for trial courts to dismiss cases that have no connection to Texas in the interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties. It's simply not fair to drag the defendant to Texas because the plaintiff believes this state will be more favorable to their case."
The trial judge based his decision of allowing the case to be heard on the erroneous belief that the federal judicial system is an inadequate venue for asbestos cases. Suspecting that the defendant would invoke his right to remove the case from the Maine state court to the federal court system, the trial judge overstepped his authority and decided that the federal system was a "black hole" for asbestos cases.
"This is simply an unfair description of the federal court system that has heard a phenomenal number of asbestos cases. More importantly it's not the trial court's role to determine whether or not the federal system is the proper venue. Instead of pointing fingers, the trial judge should have paid more attention to upholding the laws of his state and dismissed this case, which has no business being tried in Texas," said Harned.
The case at issue is No. 07-0195 in the Supreme Court of Texas.
