Herman Grant Co., Inc. v. Jo Ann Washington, 214 So. 3d 266

On May 29, 2013 a Load Cell Pod assembly from a Weigh Pod system shipped by Herman Grant (TN) and Coti (AL) collapsed at Dunn Road Builders in Laurel, Mississippi, injuring Bradford and Carl Washington (who later died).
Bradford and the Estate sued Herman Grant and Coti for defective product, alleging design and manufacture defects occurred in Tennessee and Alabama but the injury occurred in Jones County, Mississippi.
Plaintiffs filed suit in Jasper County (First Judicial District) relying on Miss. Code Ann. § 11-11-3(1)(b) because one plaintiff (Derrick Jones) was a Jasper County resident and defendants were nonresidents without Mississippi agents.
Herman Grant moved to transfer venue to the Second Judicial District of Jones County, arguing § 11-11-3(1)(a) permitted venue where a substantial event that caused the injury occurred (the accident in Laurel, Jones County).
The trial court denied the transfer, accepting plaintiffs’ assertion that the substantial acts (design/manufacture) occurred out of state and giving plaintiffs the benefit of reasonable doubt about venue facts.
The Mississippi Supreme Court reviewed de novo whether a permissible venue existed under § 11-11-3(1)(a) and concluded the accident in Laurel was a “substantial event that caused the injury,” so Jones County was the proper venue; reversed and remanded for transfer.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether venue in Jasper County was proper under § 11-11-3 when the alleged defective design/manufacture occurred out-of-state but the injurious event occurred in Jones County	Plaintiffs argued venue may be Jasper County under § 11-11-3(1)(b) because defendants are nonresidents and a plaintiff resides there; the substantial acts occurred out-of-state so (a) does not apply	Herman Grant argued § 11-11-3(1)(a) gives venue where a substantial event causing the injury occurred (Jones County), so plaintiffs may not rely on (b) when (a) provides a permissible venue	Court held venue proper in Jones County: the accident in Laurel was a substantial event causing the injury under § 11-11-3(1)(a), so transfer must be ordered

Merch. v. Forest Family Practice Clinic, P.A., 67 So. 3d 747 (2011) (abuse-of-discretion standard for venue-transfer denials)
Crenshaw v. Roman, 942 So. 2d 806 (2006) (same standard cited)
Park on Lakeland Drive, Inc. v. Spence, 941 So. 2d 203 (2006) (appellate review of venue rulings)
Austin v. Wells, 919 So. 2d 961 (2006) (standards for disturbing trial court discretion)
Hedgepeth v. Johnson, 975 So. 2d 235 (2008) (statutory interpretation of § 11-11-3; four mandatory venue options)
Forrest County Gen. Hosp. v. Conway, 700 So. 2d 324 (1997) (plaintiff’s prerogative to choose among permissible venues)
Purdue Pharma, L.P. v. Estate of Heffner, 904 So. 2d 100 (2004) (deference to plaintiff’s venue choice absent weighty reasons)
Bayer Corp. v. Reed, 932 So. 2d 786 (2006) (venue analysis and plaintiff forum choice)
Holmes v. McMillan, 21 So. 3d 614 (2009) (accident location is the substantial event causing injury for venue)
Med. Assurance Co. of Miss. v. Myers, 956 So. 2d 213 (2007) (cannot aggregate acts across jurisdictions to manufacture venue)