in accord with Fed.R.Evid. 703. Defendants have not identified any need for the appearance at trial of the Virginia doctor.
Other matters raised by defendants are red herrings. A view of the accident site is rarely necessary, and is particularly unlikely in a simple trip and fall case. Likewise the choice of law issue, which alone is not cause for transfer, is minimal. We are confident that with the assistance of counsel we can correctly apply Virginia negligence law, in a trip and fall case, if indeed it differs from Pennsylvania's.
Finally, we note that defendants rely heavily on Kyle v. Days Inn of America, 550 F. Supp. 368 (M.D. Pa. 1982) in which the court transferred a slip and fall case to the forum which contained the defendant and its witnesses. It is critical to that court's decision that plaintiff, his doctors and witnesses resided in Pittsburgh in the Western District, and not in the Middle District. Therefore, the Middle District was convenient to neither party. It is also notable that the court commented that the result may be different if the suit has been brought in the district where plaintiff and his witnesses resided. Kyle is therefore clearly distinguishable from the present case.
Because the inconvenience in this forum to defendants and their witnesses is at best equivalent to and does not outweigh the inconvenience to plaintiff and their witnesses in the alternative forum, and there being no other interests served by transfer, the defendants' motion to transfer will be denied.
AND NOW, in accord with the accompanying Opinion, it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Transfer is DENIED.
ORDERED filed this day of 4th, 1987.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.