Ard v. Boyd
- Laurel Beeler
- 3:22-cv-03764
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Ard v. Boyd, Judge Beeler transferred the case to Oregon because venue was improper in California.
The case brought by Marlin Ard against Hilary Boyd and the other defendants was moved from the Northern District of California to the District of Oregon.
What happened
Marlin Ard, an Oregon-based attorney, sued Oregon Supreme Court justices after the court suspended him from practicing law for one year. A related lawsuit involving some of the same defendants was pending in Oregon.
The California court found no connection to California, said personal jurisdiction likely was lacking, and determined that venue was proper in Oregon. Ard did not oppose transferring the case.
Judge Beeler transferred the case to the District of Oregon for lack of venue. The court said the transfer was not a final decision on the claims and did not require all defendants’ consent.
The detailed version
- Ard v. Boyd · No. 3:22-cv-03764
- Laurel Beeler
- Sept. 19, 2022
Background
The Oregon Supreme Court suspended Marlin Ard, an Oregon-based attorney, from practicing law for one year, effective February 28, 2022. Ard sued the Oregon Supreme Court justices in the Northern District of California. The opinion also notes a similar lawsuit in the District of Oregon involving at least some of the same defendants.
The court had previously ordered Ard to explain whether venue—the proper geographic location for a case—existed in the Northern District of California. Ard responded that he did not oppose transferring the case.
Reasoning
The court stated that the case had no connection with the Northern District of California, that personal jurisdiction over the defendants likely was lacking, and that venue was proper in the District of Oregon. It therefore concluded that the case should be transferred for lack of venue.
The court distinguished the transfer from a pending motion to dismiss. It said that the motion to dismiss required the consent of all parties, including defendants who had not appeared, while a transfer for lack of venue was not a dispositive ruling and did not require the consent of all parties.
Disposition
Judge Laurel Beeler ordered the case transferred to the District of Oregon for lack of venue.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.