101 N.E.3d 844
Ind. Ct. App.2018Background
- Infant Camden “Jax” Wedgewood suffered a catastrophic brain injury after attending Scribbles Ministry, a child-care ministry operated by Scribbles, LLC and Pittsboro Christian Church in Hendricks County.
- Plaintiffs (Infant Wedgewood by next friend Grandfather, Mother, and Father) are Hendricks County residents; Defendants (Scribbles, the Church, caregiver Michael, director Spurlock) are also Hendricks County residents or located there.
- Plaintiffs filed a two-count complaint in Marion County: (1) negligence against the Scribbles defendants; (2) declaratory judgment against the Indiana FSSA to determine whether FSSA had a Medicaid lien on any recovery.
- Defendants moved to transfer venue to Hendricks County under Indiana Trial Rule 75, asserting Marion County was not a preferred venue; Plaintiffs argued Marion County was preferred because FSSA (a governmental organization) is located in Marion County.
- Trial court denied the motion, reasoning Marion County was a preferred venue; defendants appealed interlocutorily.
- Court of Appeals reversed: held Marion County was not a preferred venue because FSSA’s connection was incidental, and Hendricks County was the preferred venue under T.R. 75(A)(1) and (4).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Marion County is a county of preferred venue under T.R. 75(A)(5) because Plaintiffs sued FSSA for a declaratory judgment about a potential lien | Marion County is preferred because FSSA (a governmental org.) is headquartered there and is named as a defendant | FSSA’s involvement is incidental; declaring a possible lien via declaratory relief does not create preferred venue in Marion County | Held: Marion County is not a preferred venue; FSSA’s connection is incidental and insufficient to invoke T.R. 75(A)(5) |
| Whether Hendricks County is a county of preferred venue under T.R. 75 | N/A (Plaintiffs implicitly argued venue in Marion was proper) | Hendricks is preferred because majority/all individual defendants and plaintiffs reside or are located there and ministry defendants’ offices are in Hendricks | Held: Hendricks County is a preferred venue under T.R. 75(A)(1) and (4); case must be transferred |
Key Cases Cited
- Am. Family Ins. Co. v. Ford Motor Co., 857 N.E.2d 971 (Ind. 2006) (standard of review and overview of Trial Rule 75 preferred-venue framework)
- Randolph County v. Chamness, 879 N.E.2d 555 (Ind. 2008) (purpose of preferred venue is judicial efficiency and locating evidence/witnesses)
- R & D Trans., Inc. v. A.H., 859 N.E.2d 332 (Ind. 2006) (incidental connection of chattels or parties cannot be used to manufacture preferred venue)
- Jasper Cty. Bd. of Cty. Comr’s v. Monfort, 663 N.E.2d 1166 (Ind. Ct. App. 1996) (Declaratory Judgment Act does not create preferred venue)
- Salsberry Pork Producers, Inc. v. Booth, 967 N.E.2d 1 (Ind. Ct. App. 2012) (refused to allow Marion County venue based on incidental presence of a governmental defendant when the events and majority of parties were in another county)