Cashio v. 3M Company (M.D. Tenn., July 10, 2015)

Our plain-English summary of Cashio v. 3M Company (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Tennessee, July 10, 2015).

Mark Cashio and other plaintiffs sued 3M Company and other defendants in the Middle District of Tennessee. They alleged that while Cashio was an Air Force officer stationed at England Air Force Base in Alexandria, Louisiana, he was exposed to asbestos fibers that caused malignant mesothelioma. The claims were negligence, failure to warn, strict liability, misrepresentation and conspiracy. Many defendants had moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, and those motions were still pending. The plaintiffs asked the court to move the case to Louisiana in the interests of justice. The court granted the request under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and transferred the case to the Western District of Louisiana at Shreveport. It reasoned that the exposure occurred there and the defendants' allegedly asbestos-containing products were located there. It also relied on Mr. Cashio's serious health condition, and said the transfer was warranted whether or not venue was proper in Tennessee.

We wrote this summary from the court's opinion with the help of AI. It is not the court's wording, and it is not legal advice. The full opinion is below.

The decision

• Court: U.S. District Court, Middle District of Tennessee
• Decided: July 10, 2015
• Docket: No. 3-15-0489
• Stage: Jurisdiction, venue or removal
• State: Tennessee

Outcome. The court granted the plaintiffs' motion and transferred the case from the Middle District of Tennessee to the Western District of Louisiana at Shreveport under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), over the defendants' pending personal-jurisdiction motions.

What the court held. A district court has broad discretion under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) to transfer a case in the interest of justice, and may do so whether or not venue is proper in the transferring court.

Issues decided: Personal Jurisdiction, Venue, Removal and Transfer.

The people and their exposure

• Mark Cashio: mesothelioma

The defendants

• 3M Company

Other decisions in this case

Other rulings from the same court in the same case, in our library:

• Cashio v. 3M Company (August 4, 2015). The district court granted the plaintiffs' motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) and transferred the case to the Western District of Louisiana, rejecting the defendants' request for reconsideration.

The court's opinion

The text below is Google Scholar's copy of the court's opinion, a public record. Numbers in brackets, such as [*921], mark where each page of the printed reporter begins.

MARK D. CASHIO, etal.

v.

3M COMPANY, etal.

No. 3-15-0489.

July 10, 2015.

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division.

MEMORANDUM

TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge.

Pending before the Court, among other things, is Plaintiff's Motion to Transfer Venue (Docket No. 166). For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), and this action is transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana at Shreveport.

FACTS

Plaintiffs filed this action alleging that, while Plaintiff Mark Cashio was an officer in the U.S. Air Force and stationed at England Air Force Base in Alexandria, Louisiana, he was exposed to asbestos fibers which caused him to have malignant mesothelioma, a fatal cancer of the lining of the lung or abdominal cavity.

Plaintiffs allege causes of action against Defendants for negligence, failure to warn, strict liability, misrepresentation and conspiracy. Numerous Defendants have filed Motions to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, and those Motions are still pending. Plaintiffs now have moved to transfer venue of this case to Louisiana "in the interests of justice." TRANSFER OF VENUE

Plaintiffs have requested, if the Court finds that venue is improper here, that it transfer this case to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) does provide that, if it be in the interest of justice, the Court may transfer any case which is filed in the wrong venue to any district in which it could have been brought.

28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) provides: "For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought." As the permissible language of the transfer statute suggests, district courts have broad discretion to determine when party convenience or the interest of justice make a transfer appropriate. Reese v. CNH America LLC, 574 F.3d 315, 320 (6th Cir. 2009).

The Court finds, in its discretion, that this case should be transferred to the Western District of Louisiana, where Plaintiff's exposure to asbestos occurred and where Defendants' products allegedly containing asbestos were located. Whether or not venue is proper in this Court, and particularly in light of Mr. Cashio's serious health condition, the interests of justice are best served by this transfer.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Sources

• The opinion on Google Scholar
• Tennessee asbestos laws
• Tennessee asbestos exposure sites