TD Bank, N.A. v. Crown Leasing Partners, LLC
224 N.C. App. 649
| N.C. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- TD Bank, N.A. filed a complaint in Buncombe County against Defendants (Crown Leasing, Shields, Blanchat), all residents of Catawba County.
- Defendants moved to dismiss for improper venue or, alternatively, to change venue under § 1-83, which the trial court denied.
- The hearing included Defendants arguing TD Bank is a foreign entity not resident in NC and that venue should be in Catawba County where defendants reside.
- The trial court found venue proper in Buncombe under § 1-82 and denied the mandatory change of venue under § 1-83(1) and the convenience/ends-of-justice provision under § 1-83(2).
- This interlocutory appeal challenges the denial of the change of venue and the court’s venue analysis for a national banking association plaintiff.
- The North Carolina appellate court ultimately held that venue should be in Catawba County and reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Buncombe is proper venue under § 1-82 for a foreign banking plaintiff. | TD Bank argues it is not a NC domestic entity and venue should follow where defendants reside. | Defendants contend venue is proper in Catawba County since they reside there and the plaintiff is not a NC resident. | Venue must be changed; proper venue is Catawba County. |
Key Cases Cited
- Security Mills of Asheville, Inc. v. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., N.A., 281 N.C. 525 (1972) (distinguishes 12 U.S.C. § 94 venue rule for receiverships)
- Leggett v. Federal Land Bank, 204 N.C. 151 (1933) (discusses foreign corporation status and service of process for federal instrumentality banks)
- Stewart v. Southeastern Reg'l Med. Ctr., 142 N.C. App. 456 (2001) (venue when plaintiff is nonresident and defendants are residents follows county of defendants’ residence)
- Veazey v. City of Durham, 231 N.C. 357 (1950) (interlocutory orders generally not appealable)
- Turner v. Hammocks Beach Corp., 363 N.C. 555 (2009) (interlocutory appealability of venue orders discussed)
- Roberts v. Adventure Holdings, LLC, N.C. App. (2010) (discusses when denial of venue is immediately appealable)
- Caldwell v. Smith, 203 N.C. App. 725 (2010) (denial of change of venue affects substantial rights and is appealable)