Maddox v. Ford Motor Co., 73 So. 3d 597

James and Lula Maddox died on Dec 8, 2006 after a Ford Escort collision in Tuscaloosa County.
Charles Maddox, as administrator, filed a product-liability complaint in the Jefferson County Bessemer Division against Ford, Mazda, TRW, and Long-Lewis.
Plaintiff alleged improper seat-belt design/manufacture and related negligence, wanton conduct, and AEMLD claims.
Defendants originally sold the vehicle in Bessemer (Long-Lewis in 1993); the Maddoxes bought it in 2004 in Tuscaloosa County.
Defendants moved under forum non conveniens to transfer to Tuscaloosa Circuit Court; trial court denied transfer.
The trial court discussed the Bessemer Act’s exclusivity and the parties sought mandamus review.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Bessemer Act’s exclusivity bars forum non conveniens transfer	Maddox argues exclusivity confines actions to Bessemer Division	Automobile defendants contend exclusivity prevents transfer outside Bessemer	No; Bessemer Act does not bar forum non conveniens transfer analysis
Whether § 6-3-7 applies to the Bessemer Division for venue purposes in this context	§ 6-3-7 should not apply to transfer under forum non conveniens	§ 6-3-7 applies; Tuscaloosa could be proper under venue rules	Yes; § 6-3-7 applies to the Bessemer Division for transfer analysis
Whether transferring to Tuscaloosa County would be in the interest of justice	Transfer would not be in the interest of justice given venue in Bessemer	Transfer would better serve convenience and justice	The petition was denied to compel a transfer; trial court to reconsider under the forum non conveniens standard

Ex parte Walter Indus., Inc., 879 So.2d 547 (Ala.2003) (venue vs. jurisdiction interpretation under Bessemer Act)
Ex parte Flexible Prods. Co., 961 So.2d 111 (Ala.2006) (Bessemer Act venue exclusivity interpretation)
Haynes Downard Andra & Jones, LLP, 924 So.2d 687 (Ala.2005) (exclusive jurisdiction vs. exclusive venue; impact on § 6-3-7(c)-(d))
Ex parte Children's Hospital of Alabama, 931 So.2d 1 (Ala.2005) (venue proper in Jefferson County; Bessemer Division boundaries)
Ex parte Sawyer, 892 So.2d 898 (Ala.2004) (proof requirement for § 6-3-21.1 transfer)
Ex parte National Security Ins. Co., 727 So.2d 788 (Ala.1998) (mandamus scope and venue review)
Ex parte ADT Sec. Servs., Inc., 933 So.2d 343 (Ala.2006) (mandamus standards and venue review baseline)
Ex parte Ford Motor Co., 47 So.3d 234 (Ala.2010) (Murdock, J., concurrence on venue/interest-of-justice considerations)