Wednesday, November 10, 2010

Rule 1925 Opinion Issued By Luzerne County Judge Van Jura in Post-Koken Transfer of Venue Case

Tort Talkers may recall reading here that Judge Joseph Van Jura of the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas recently issued an August 16, 2010 Order in the post-Koken case of Wissinger v. Brady, Laubach, and State Farm, No. 3792-CIVIL-2010 (Luz. Co. Aug. 16, 2010, Van Jura, J.), granting the Preliminary Objections of a third party defendant asserting improper venue under Pa. R.C.P. 1006.

I have secured a copy of the Judge's Rule 1925 Opinion issued in this matter now that the case is going up on appeal.

The plaintiff involved in this matter was from Northumberland County. The accident occurred in Northumberland County. The tortfeasor defendants were from Montour County. Under Pennsylvania's venue Rule (Rule 1006), it would appear that venue in this matter was proper at least in the place where the accident happened or where the tortfeasor resided or could be served.

According to Judge Van Jura's Opinion, the plaintiff was arguing that suit could be filed in Luzerne County on account of the fact that State Farm did business in that county.

The Court rejected this argument and also noted that there was no joint and several liability between the third party defendant and the UIM carrier to otherwise support venue in Luzerne County.

I thank the prevailing defense attorney, Aaron Decker from the Plains, Pennsylvania office of Snyder & Associates, in-house counsel for Nationwide, for forwarding this Opinion to my attention.

Anyone desiring a copy of this Order may contact me at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.