In the case of Barnowski v. CBRE Global Investors, LLC, No. 2023-CV-2568 (C.P. Lacka. Co. Oct. 2, 2025 Nealon, J.), the court addressed venue issues in a premises liability action.
According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff commenced this premises liability lawsuit against two (2) owners of a property that was located in Montgomery County where the Plaintiff allegedly fell.
The Plaintiff asserted that venue was proper in Lackawanna County under Pa. R.C.P. 1006(c) and 2179(a)(2) since he alleged joint and several liability and given that one of the Defendants allegedly regularly conducted business in Lackawanna County.
The Defendants filed Preliminary Objections asserting improper venue.
The Defendants filed Preliminary Objections asserting improper venue.
Given that the Defendant’s Preliminary Objections were not supported by affidavits or evidence, the parties were initially directed to conduct venue-related discovery pursuant to Pa. R.C.P. 1028(c)(2) and to, thereafter, resubmit the issue to the court.
During the course of that discovery, the Defendants produced a corporate designee who testified under oath that she did not know whether the Defendant’s conducted any business in Lackawanna County or owned any property or employed any workers in this county.
The court noted that the Defendant’s Preliminary Objections asserting improper venue was resubmitted to the court for a decision based upon the limited evidentiary record noted above.
In his decision, Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas reaffirmed well-settled law of Pennsylvania that a Plaintiff’s choice of forum is entitled to “great weight.”
During the course of that discovery, the Defendants produced a corporate designee who testified under oath that she did not know whether the Defendant’s conducted any business in Lackawanna County or owned any property or employed any workers in this county.
 |
| Judge Terrence R. Nealon Lackawanna County |
The court noted that the Defendant’s Preliminary Objections asserting improper venue was resubmitted to the court for a decision based upon the limited evidentiary record noted above.
In his decision, Judge Terrence R. Nealon of the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas reaffirmed well-settled law of Pennsylvania that a Plaintiff’s choice of forum is entitled to “great weight.”
The court also noted that the Defendants had the burden of producing evidence to establish that venue was improper in the chosen forum and that a change of venue was warranted.
The court found that the Defendants, despite being afforded a reasonable opportunity to produce evidence to support their improper venue argument, had failed to do so. As such, Judge Nealon ruled that, given that the Plaintiff had asserted joint and several liability against the Defendants, venue is proper as to both Defendants and the Preliminary Objections asserting improper venue with respect to Lackawanna County was overruled.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
Source: Lackawanna Jurist (Oct. 31, 2025).
The court found that the Defendants, despite being afforded a reasonable opportunity to produce evidence to support their improper venue argument, had failed to do so. As such, Judge Nealon ruled that, given that the Plaintiff had asserted joint and several liability against the Defendants, venue is proper as to both Defendants and the Preliminary Objections asserting improper venue with respect to Lackawanna County was overruled.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
Source: Lackawanna Jurist (Oct. 31, 2025).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.