USA ex rel. Franklin Harris v. Coleman American Moving Services, Inc.
1:14-cv-00309
M.D. Ala.Sep 17, 2015Background
- Relator Franklin Harris (former Covan driver) filed a sealed qui tam FCA suit alleging Covan/Coleman fraudulently inflated weights on military household goods shipments. The United States initially declined to intervene.
- Defendants: Coleman World Group, LLC (Alabama) and Coleman American Moving Services, Inc. d/b/a Covan Worldwide Moving Services, Inc. (Missouri corp. with principal place in Midland City, Alabama; offices in 17 states including Fayetteville, NC and facilities in SC).
- A related qui tam, United States ex rel. Figueroa v. Covan, was litigated and settled in the District of South Carolina; the government there filed an intervenor complaint and South Carolina court granted partial summary judgment in that matter before settlement.
- The United States moved to transfer Harris’s case to the District of South Carolina (joined by defendants); both the government and defendants intend to seek dismissal there based on overlap with Figueroa.
- The district court evaluated 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) factors and concluded plaintiff’s chosen forum is entitled to less deference in qui tam cases; it found judicial efficiency/public interest strongly favored transfer because the South Carolina court is familiar with the related litigation and its preclusive effect.
- Court ordered transfer to the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina and left limited discovery requests to that court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to move for transfer | US lacks standing to request transfer | US is real party in interest and defendants join motion | Court considered motion despite standing question because defendants joined it; proceeded to transfer analysis |
| Proper transferee venue under §1404(a) | Harris did not contest South Carolina as available forum | South Carolina proper because Covan transacts business there | Court found action could have been brought in District of South Carolina |
| Weight of plaintiff's choice of forum | Harris urged deference to his chosen forum | Deference diminished in qui tam since US is real party in interest; chosen forum not Harris’s home forum | Court gave Harris’s forum choice little weight |
| Transfer based on public interest/judicial efficiency | Harris argued his claims differ from Figueroa and should stay | Defendants & US argued South Carolina should decide preclusion, jurisdictional, and source issues because of prior related litigation | Court held public interest and judicial efficiency strongly favor transfer and granted transfer |
Key Cases Cited
- Tinson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870 (11th Cir. 2008) (United States is the real party in interest in qui tam suits)
- Sinochem Int'l Co. v. Malaysia Int'l Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422 (U.S. 2007) (plaintiff’s choice of forum is entitled to less deference when it is not the plaintiff’s home forum)
- Robinson v. Giarmarco & Bill, P.C., 74 F.3d 253 (11th Cir. 1996) (general rule giving deference to plaintiff’s choice of forum)
- Gould v. Nat'l Life Ins. Co., 990 F. Supp. 1354 (M.D. Ala. 1998) (enumerating § 1404(a) transfer factors)