05 LC 14
9000
House
Bill 238
By:
Representatives Fleming of the
117th,
Keen of the
179th,
Burkhalter of the
50th,
Dodson of the
75th,
Cooper of the
41st,
and others
A
BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
AN ACT
To
amend Title 9 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to civil
practice, so as to change certain provisions relating to venue; to change
provisions relating to determination of venue in actions against joint
defendants and the effect of dismissal of one or more parties; to provide that a
court of this state may decline to adjudicate certain claims under the doctrine
of forum non conveniens; to provide for practice and procedure in connection
therewith; to provide for other related matters; to provide for an effective
date and applicability; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other
purposes.
BE
IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF GEORGIA:
SECTION
1.
Title
9 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to civil practice, is
amended by striking Code Section 9-10-31, relating to actions against certain
codefendants residing in different counties, and inserting in lieu thereof the
following:
"9-10-31.
(a)
The General
Assembly finds that Paragraph IV of Section II of Article VI of the Georgia
Constitution permits a trial and entry of judgment against a resident of Georgia
in a county other than the county of the
defendant́s
residence only if the Georgia resident defendant is a joint obligor, joint
tort-feasor, joint promisor, copartner, or joint trespasser.
(b)
Subject to the provisions of Code Section 9-10-31.1,
joint
Joint or
joint and several tort-feasors, obligors,
or promisors, or joint contractors or copartners, residing in different
counties, may be subject to an action as such in the same action in any county
in which one or more of the defendants reside.
If,
however, the court determines prior to the commencement of trial
that:
(1)
The plaintiff has brought the action in bad faith against all defendants
residing in the county in which the action is brought; or
(2)
As a matter of law, no defendant residing in the county in which the action is
brought is a proper party,
the
action shall be transferred to the county and court which the plaintiff elects
in which venue is proper. The burden of proof on the issue of venue shall be on
the party claiming improper venue by a preponderance of evidence.
(b)(c)
If all defendants who reside in the county in which an action is pending are
discharged from liability before
the
commencement of trial
or upon the
return of a verdict by the jury or the court hearing the case without a
jury, a nonresident defendant may require
that the case be transferred to a county and court in which venue would
otherwise be proper. If venue would be proper in more than one county, the
plaintiff may elect from among the counties in which venue is proper the county
and the court in which the action shall proceed.
(c)
If all defendants who reside in the county in which the action is pending are
discharged from liability after the commencement of trial, the case may be
transferred to a county and court in which venue would otherwise lie only if all
parties consent to such transfer.
(d)
For purposes of this Code section, trial shall be deemed to have commenced upon
the jury being sworn or, in the instance of a trial without a jury, upon the
first witness being sworn.
(e)(d)
Nothing in this Code section shall be deemed to alter or amend the pleading
requirements of Chapter 11 of this title relating to the filing of complaints or
answers.
(f)
This Code section shall apply to actions filed on or after July 1,
1999."
SECTION
2.
Title
9 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to civil practice, is
amended by adding after Code Section 9-10-31 a new Code Section 9-10-31.1 to
read as follows:
"9-10-31.1.
(a)
If a court of this state, on written motion of a party, finds that in the
interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties and witnesses a claim
or action would be more properly heard in a forum outside this state or in a
different county of proper venue within this state, the court shall decline to
adjudicate the matter under the doctrine of forum non conveniens. As to a claim
or action that would be more properly heard in a forum outside this state, the
court shall dismiss the claim or action. As to a claim or action that would be
more properly heard in a different county of proper venue within this state, the
venue shall be transferred to the appropriate county. In determining whether to
grant a motion to dismiss an action or to transfer venue under the doctrine of
forum non conveniens, the court shall give consideration to the following
factors:
(1)
Relative ease of access to sources of proof;
(2)
Availability and cost of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling
witnesses;
(3)
Possibility of viewing of the premises, if viewing would be appropriate to the
action;
(4)
Unnecessary expense or trouble to the defendant not necessary to the
plaintiff́s
own right to pursue his or her remedy;
(5)
Administrative difficulties for the forum courts;
(6)
Existence of local interests in deciding the case locally; and
(7)
The traditional deference given to a
plaintiff́s
choice of forum.
(b)
A court may not dismiss a claim under this Code section until the defendant
files with the court or with the clerk of the court a written stipulation that,
with respect to a new action on the claim commenced by the plaintiff, all the
defendants waive the right to assert a statute of limitations defense in all
other states of the United States in which the claim was not barred by
limitations at the time the claim was filed in this state as necessary to effect
a tolling of the limitations periods in those states beginning on the date the
claim was filed in this state and ending on the date the claim is
dismissed."
SECTION
3.
This
Act shall become effective July 1, 2005, and shall apply with respect to actions
pending on that date as well as actions filed on or after that
date.
SECTION
4.
All
laws and parts of laws in conflict with this Act are repealed.
