Transfer of coverage dispute not warranted merely because related action is pending in different forum.

Posted by

White Mountains Reinsurance Co. of America v. Travelers Cas. & Surety Co., Case No. 11 Civ. 390 (DLC) (S.D.N.Y., Apr. 13, 2011)

White Mountains filed an action against Travelers in the Supreme Court of New York, New York County, seeking a declaratory judgment and alleging breach of contract in connection with certain reinsurance contracts. Travelers removed the matter to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, then moved to transfer the action, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1404, to the District of Connecticut where Travelers had previously filed a related action against other entities. White Mountains was not a party to the Connecticut actions.

Travelers argued that the matter should be transferred to Connecticut because the Connecticut actions are related, and that White Mountains filed its action in New York as a “pre-emptive” suit for declaratory relief. In considering whether transfer of an action is appropriate, the Court considered the following well-established factors:

1) the plaintiff’s choice of forum; 2) the convenience of witnesses; 3) the location of relevant documents and relative ease of access to sources of proof; 4) the convenience of parties; 5) the locus of operative facts; 6) the availability of process to compel the attendance of unwilling witnesses; and 7) the relative means of the parties.

The Court denied the motion to transfer, explaining that White Mountains’ choice of forum is entitled to “great weight”. The court recognized that White Mountains could have filed its action in Connecticut, but its choice to file in New York was not inappropriate especially considering the underlying transactions have a strong connection to the Southern District of New York. Moreover, the only factor that weighed in favor of transfer was that the actions pending in Connecticut were related. Thus, Travelers failed to meet its burden of establishing, “by clear and convincing evidence”, that a transfer of venue was warranted.

For a copy of the decision click here

Patrick Omilian and Dan Gerber

https://www.goldbergsegalla.com/attorneys/patrick-b-omilian

https://www.goldbergsegalla.com/attorneys/daniel-w-gerber