Court: Supreme Court of Alabama; August 4, 2000; Alabama; State Supreme Court
Jim Burke Automotive, Inc. petitioned the Supreme Court of Alabama for a writ of mandamus to vacate a lower court's orders that denied its motions to dismiss or transfer a lawsuit filed by Clarence Ford. The case, pending in Perry Circuit Court, involved allegations of fraud, negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and tort of outrage related to a "documentary fee" charged during the sale of a vehicle. Ford claimed that the defendants misrepresented the fee's allocation. Jim Burke sought to compel arbitration based on an arbitration clause in the "Buyer's Order" Ford signed. Additionally, Burke argued that Perry County was an improper venue and requested a transfer to Jefferson County, where the vehicle was purchased. The trial court denied the motions to dismiss or transfer and allowed Ford to conduct discovery before ruling on the arbitration motion.
The court outlined the standards for granting a writ of mandamus, which requires a clear legal right for the petitioner, an imperative duty on the respondent, lack of an adequate remedy, and properly invoked jurisdiction. The court's review of venue rulings is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion based on the facts presented. Ultimately, the Supreme Court granted the petition in part and denied it in part, indicating that it found some merit in Jim Burke's arguments regarding the venue and arbitration issues.
Jim Burke asserts that the trial court wrongly denied its motion to dismiss or transfer the case, supported by an affidavit from comptroller Dave Bolden. Bolden stated that all contracts related to the vehicle purchase were executed in Jefferson County, and that Jim Burke has no business or property in Perry County, where the case was filed. Under Ala. Code 1975, 6-3-21.1, a court can transfer a civil action for convenience or in the interest of justice. The trial judge has discretion regarding such motions, which can only be reviewed for abuse of discretion through a writ of mandamus. Jim Burke claims it established a prima facie case for transfer due to the convenience of parties and witnesses, as Ford did not counter with evidence. The court referenced Ex parte Swift Loan Finance Co. as a similar case, where the defendants successfully argued for transfer based on the convenience of the forum. However, the trial court found that Jim Burke did not demonstrate that Jefferson County was significantly more convenient than Perry County, thus denying the motion to transfer without abuse of discretion.
Additionally, Jim Burke contends that the trial court abused its discretion by granting a 90-day continuance for discovery related to its motion to compel arbitration. The Federal Arbitration Act enforces arbitration agreements but allows the court to determine if such an agreement exists. The trial judge’s decision to permit discovery was not erroneous, but failing to limit it was an error. The appropriate scope of discovery should focus solely on whether Ford agreed to arbitrate the dispute. Therefore, the petition is partially granted to restrict discovery, while the motion to transfer is denied. The court issued a writ accordingly.
