•  
  •  

Home > Journals > Michigan Law Review > MLR > Volume 52 > Issue 7 (1954)

 

Abstract

Petitioner instituted a treble damage suit alleging violation of the antitrust laws in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Florida, naming the insurance commissioner of Georgia, the insurance commissioner of Florida, and four insurance companies residing and doing business in the Southern District of Florida as defendants. The Georgia insurance commissioner, who was personally served in the Northern District of Florida, entered a special appearance to dismiss the action for improper venue. Petitioner contended that the Georgia commissioner was "found or has an agent" in the Southern District of Florida on the theory that co-conspirators are each other's agents, and since other members of the · alleged conspiracy were in the Southern District of Florida, venue in that district was proper as to all defendants. Respondent judge held that as to the Georgia commissioner venue was improper and ordered a severance and transfer of the action against him to the Northern District of Georgia where said commissioner resided. A petition to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court in Florida to vacate and set aside the order of severance and transfer was dismissed as an inappropriate remedy. On certiorari the Supreme Court held, affirmed. The writ was not necessary or appropriate in aid of the court's jurisdiction and it was not clear that appeal provided an inadequate remedy. Justices Frankfurter, Jackson, and Minton dissented on the ground that the respondent judge appeared to be so clearly correct that certiorari should not have been granted and therefore the case should have been dismissed without opinion. Bankers Life and Casualty Co. v. Holland, 346 U.S. 379, 74 S.Ct. 145 (1953).

Download

Share

COinS