95 N.E.3d 185
Ind. Ct. App.2018Background
- CTB, Inc., an Indiana corporation, has its registered agent and registered office in Milford, Kosciusko County.
- CTB operates as a motor carrier and broker and, per federal FMCSA rules, designated two process agents in Marion County (but has no offices there).
- Justin and Nicole Tunis sued CTB in Marion County after an injury involving cargo transported from CTB's Milford facility. Service was effected via the FMCSA-listed Marion County process agents.
- CTB moved to transfer venue to Kosciusko County under Ind. Trial Rule 75(A)(4) (preferred venue where the defendant organization's "principal office" is located); the trial court denied the motion.
- The trial court read American Family to allow multiple preferred venues based on locations of process agents; CTB appealed interlocutorily.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed whether "principal office" under Trial Rule 75(A)(4) means the corporation's registered office (Kosciusko) or any county where a process agent is designated (Marion).
Issues
| Issue | Tunis's Argument | CTB's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a corporation's "principal office" under Trial Rule 75(A)(4) includes counties where the corporation has FMCSA-designated process agents | Designation of process agents in Marion means CTB has a principal office there, making venue proper in Marion | "Principal office" means the corporation's registered office under Indiana law (located in Kosciusko), not FMCSA process-agent locations | "Principal office" for Rule 75(A)(4) is the registered office; Kosciusko is preferred venue; transfer granted |
| Whether appointment of FMCSA process agents constitutes an "agency" under Rule 75(A)(4) (i.e., a business place making venue proper where claim arose or relates) | Process agents create an "agency" in Marion County | "Agency" means a place of business or branch office; appointment of process agents is insufficient | Appointment of process agents is insufficient to establish an "agency"; claim did not arise from any Marion business location |
Key Cases Cited
- Am. Family Ins. v. Ford Motor Co., 857 N.E.2d 971 (Ind. 2006) (interprets "principal office" in Trial Rule 75(A)(4) to mean registered office)
- Miller v. Danz, 36 N.E.3d 455 (Ind. 2015) (standard of review for rule interpretation is de novo)
- Hollingsworth v. Key Benefit Adm'rs, Inc., 658 N.E.2d 653 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) ("agency" under Rule 75(A)(4) refers to a place of business or branch office)