Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
First Southern Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Lani Kai, Ltd.
Citations: 505 So. 2d 312; 1987 Ala. LEXIS 4122Docket: 86-18
Court: Supreme Court of Alabama; January 15, 1987; Alabama; State Supreme Court
A petition for a writ of mandamus was filed against Judge Douglas Inge Johnstone of the Mobile Circuit Court after he denied a motion to change venue from Mobile County to Baldwin County in a case initiated by First Southern Federal Savings and Loan Association (FSF) against Lani Kai, Ltd. and several individuals, including Milton Andrews, Dr. Frank A. Kruse, and Doris H. Nonnenmacher. The case involved three counts: (1) damages for nonpayment of a promissory note and breach of a modification agreement; (2) damages for money had and received; and (3) damages for breach of an unconditional guaranty. The petitioners argued for a venue change based on two grounds: Lani Kai, Ltd. did not conduct business in Mobile County, and none of the individual defendants resided there. An affidavit from Andrews stated that Lani Kai, Ltd. was based in Gulf Shores, Baldwin County, and acknowledged that Dr. Kruse resided in Louisiana. The petitioners contended that the venue in Mobile was improper without Dr. Kruse because Alabama Code § 6-3-2(a)(2) requires actions on contracts to be commenced in the county where a defendant resides, provided they have a permanent address in the state. The court referenced Ex parte Cummings, Gazaway, Scott, Inc., which established that venue in a county can be proper for both resident and nonresident defendants if the action arises from a contract executed in that county. Since the promissory note was payable in Mobile County, the court ruled that venue was appropriate there for all defendants, including Dr. Kruse, thus affirming that Judge Johnstone did not err in denying the motion to transfer. The writ of mandamus was denied, with concurrence from several justices and dissenting opinions from Chief Justice Torbert and Justice Steagall.