Penrose v. Buffalo Trace Distillery, Inc.
4:17-cv-00294
E.D. Mo.May 30, 2017Background
- Plaintiffs filed a putative nationwide class action in the Eastern District of Missouri alleging Defendants misrepresented that Old Charter bourbon is aged 8 years by retaining the numeral “8” on bottles after removing the express “aged 8 years” statement.
- Jurisdiction is federal diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d); defendants are Buffalo Trace and Old Charter (Kentucky corporations) and Sazerac (Louisiana). No plaintiff resides in Kentucky; one class representative is a Missouri resident.
- Defendants moved to transfer the case to the Western District of Kentucky under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) for convenience of parties and witnesses and the interest of justice. Plaintiffs opposed transfer.
- The parties agreed the action could have been brought in the Western District of Kentucky, so the dispute concerned whether transfer was sufficiently warranted under § 1404(a).
- The court applied the § 1404(a) factors (convenience of parties, convenience of witnesses, interest of justice) and afforded deference to Plaintiffs’ choice of forum.
- The court denied the motion, finding Defendants failed to show the balance of factors strongly favored transfer (witness convenience and interests of justice did not strongly favor Kentucky).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether venue should be transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) | Missouri forum is proper and entitled to deference; plaintiff chose forum and witnesses can travel or be deposed | Western District of Kentucky is more convenient because most witnesses, corporate offices, and evidence are in Kentucky | Transfer denied — Defendants did not meet burden to show factors strongly favor transfer |
| Weight to give plaintiff's choice of forum | Plaintiff's forum choice should receive considerable deference (one rep is a Missouri resident) | Forum choice is less significant because majority of operative facts and defendants are in Kentucky | Court afforded deference to plaintiff's choice and declined to displace it |
| Convenience of witnesses | Employees of defendants will voluntarily appear or provide deposition testimony in Missouri; no identified non-party witnesses requiring Kentucky | Most likely witnesses and many documents are located in Kentucky, making Kentucky more convenient | Convenience of witnesses favored plaintiffs because no non-party witnesses established; did not strongly favor Kentucky |
| Interests of justice (judicial economy, local law, costs, etc.) | No compelling justice-related reason to transfer; electronic records reduce location-based burdens | Local Kentucky court and proximity to corporate defendants favor Kentucky for efficiency | No factors strongly favored transfer; interests of justice did not warrant transfer |
Key Cases Cited
- Van Dusen v. Barrack, 376 U.S. 612 (establishes § 1404(a) purpose to prevent waste and protect parties from unnecessary inconvenience)
- Stewart Org., Inc. v. Ricoh Corp., 487 U.S. 22 (directs individualized, case-by-case balancing under § 1404(a))
- Terra Int'l, Inc. v. Miss. Chem. Corp., 119 F.3d 688 (sets out the three primary § 1404(a) factors and related considerations)
- In re Apple, Inc., 602 F.3d 909 (Eighth Circuit guidance that no exhaustive factor list; consider case-specific factors)
- Graff v. Qwest Commc'ns Corp., 33 F. Supp. 2d 1117 (transfer should not be granted where it merely shifts inconvenience to the resisting party)