Finch, R. v. American Premier Underwriters Inc.
1416 EDA 2015
| Pa. Super. Ct. | Sep 30, 2016Background
- Plaintiff Robert O. Finch (filed under FELA) sued Penn Central, Conrail, and Norfolk Southern in Philadelphia County alleging workplace exposure that caused bladder cancer; he worked for the defendants from 1970–2005.
- Defendants moved to transfer venue to Blair County under Pa.R.C.P. 1006(d)(1) (forum non conveniens), asserting most relevant witnesses, medical providers, and the workplace are in Blair County.
- Defendants supported the motion with affidavits from a claims manager (Tatum) and a former supervisor (Freas); Tatum identified several retired Blair County witnesses and treating providers; Freas stated personal burdens from multi‑day travel to Philadelphia.
- Plaintiff opposed the motion, submitting affidavits from five former co‑workers (all retired) stating they would not be burdened by testifying in Philadelphia and listing five former corporate executives (four in Philadelphia, one in Atlanta) he intends to subpoena.
- Trial court granted the transfer to Blair County; plaintiff appealed. The Superior Court vacated and remanded, finding the defendants failed to meet the heavy burden required to show Philadelphia would be oppressive or vexatious.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether trial court abused discretion in transferring venue under Pa.R.C.P. 1006(d)(1) | Finch: defendants failed to identify witnesses who would be vexed or oppressed by Philadelphia; plaintiff submitted affidavits showing willingness of multiple witnesses to travel and identified former executives near Philadelphia | Defendants: Blair County is the site of plaintiff’s work/exposure, most former supervisors/co‑workers and treating physicians are in Blair County, causing expense and business disruption if forced to litigate in Philadelphia | Vacated transfer; Superior Court held defendants did not meet their "heavy burden" to show plaintiff's chosen forum is oppressive or vexatious — facts showed inconvenience, not oppression |
Key Cases Cited
- Bratic v. Rubendall, 99 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2014) (framework for reviewing forum non conveniens transfers and deference to plaintiff's choice of forum)
- Cheeseman v. Lethal Exterminator, Inc., 701 A.2d 156 (Pa. 1997) (defendant must show on the record that chosen forum is vexatious or oppressive)
- Okkerse v. Howe, 556 A.2d 827 (Pa. 1989) (forum non conveniens balances plaintiff convenience against fairness and practicality)
- Zappala v. Brandolini Property Management, Inc., 909 A.2d 1272 (Pa. 2006) (trial courts have considerable discretion in venue transfers; appellate review is for abuse of discretion)
- Lee v. Thrower, 102 A.3d 1018 (Pa. Super. 2014) (factors for transfer include distance, witness burden, and access to proof; no single factor is dispositive)
- Fessler v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc., 131 A.3d 44 (Pa. Super. 2015) (totality of circumstances governs forum non conveniens analysis)
- Norman v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co., 323 A.2d 850 (Pa. Super. 1974) (expert witness location not controlling in transfer analysis)