Professional Documents
Culture Documents
5
Case 5:06-cv-00064-RS-MD Document 5 Filed 03/24/2006 Page 1 of 5
Page 1 of 5
DANIEL FLEMING,
Plaintiff,
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
1
Plaintiff erroneously identifies the S ecreta ry of the Florida De partm ent o f Co rrection s as “ M r.
M cDo nald,” instea d of M r. McD ono ugh . (Doc. 1, p. 1).
Dockets.Justia.com
Case 5:06-cv-00064-RS-MD Document 5 Filed 03/24/2006 Page 2 of 5
Page 2 of 5
Page 3 of 5
2
In American Dredging, the Co urt explained :
3
In Cow an, the Fifth Circuit exp lained the p roper ap plicability of the doctrine of forum non
conveniens in light of the en actm ent of sec tion 1404 (a):
Section 1404(a) superseded the commo n law doctrine of forum non conveniens
insofar as tran sfer to ano ther federa l district co urt is possible. As the Sup rem e Co urt
pointed out in Norwood v. Kirkpatrick, “the harshest re sult of th e ap plica tion of th e old
doctrine of forum non conveniens, dismissal of the action, was eliminated by the
provision in § 1404(a) for transfer.” 349 U.S. 29, 32, 75 S.Ct. 544, 546, 99 L.Ed. 789
(1955).
Page 4 of 5
4
Although the plain tiff’s ch oice of fo rum is ord inarily given con side ration, Norwood v. Kirkpatrick,
349 U.S. 29, 32 (1955), “where the operative facts underlying the cause of action did not occ ur w ithin
the forum chosen by Plaintiff, the choice of forum is entitled to less consideration.” Windmere Corp.
v. Rem ington Produ cts, Inc., 617 F. Sup p. 8, 10 (S.D. Fla. 1985).
Page 5 of 5