HomeMy WebLinkAbout2741 this particular action? jJnder the ter~s of the all~ged bailment,
the vQSSel was to be deliver~d to Plaintiff's place of business in
~ort Pierca, a~d upon delivery the Plaintiff was to pay the Defendant
the sum vf $1,200.00. In the Court's opinion, this is sufficient
to establish venue in St. Lucie County. The suit miqht have also
been filed in Monroe Cour~ty, hawever, it is the Plaintiff, not the
Defendant, who ;~as the option to chose the forum. As stated by the
Court in Greyhound Corp. v. Rosart, F1a.App.1960, 124 So.2d 708
"In Florida, the election of venue is with
the p~aintiff and although it may be more convenient - ~
to the defendant and possibly to the plaintiff that
the action be prosecuted in another county ar circuit,
nevertheless, if the election is one which the plaintiff
has properly exarcised under the statute, then the
election still remains his and not one which can be
di~tated by the defendant. To hold otherwise
would be to nulify the venue statute which gives the
plaintiff the right to file his action.in a particular
place under certain specified conditions."
The Court havir.g determined Defendant's Motion to Transfer
to be without merit, said motion is hereby denied and the Defendant ,
shall have twenty (20) days fraa the date of this order to file his
answer or other pleadings.
i DONE AND ORDERED at Fort Pierce, St. Lucie County, Florida,
~
this 13th day of September, A.D.. 1974.
~
CIRCUIT JiJDGE
Copies furnished to:
William B, Le Cates, CARLISLE & TWOROGER, P.O. Box 327, Ft.
Lauderdale, FL 33309
John N. Moore, III, Esq., NEBLETT & SAUER, 3600 North Rooe~velt
s~~a Key West, FL 33040 ~,91512
f l40 A~~ RECQNf6A-
s~. ~.uc~~ ct+~+~"
- ao~~
~~~~'~z ;
~co~+~vE~~°~o-"A~
~ 12 ~M'1~
- 3 - 600K~~ PACE~7JV
_ - . ~ ~ 'y
_ _ _
~
~