Panchitkaew v. Blue Ridge Beverage Company, Inc.
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-09753
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Panchitkaew v. Blue Ridge, Judge McMahon transferred the product-injury case to New York’s Eastern District after finding venue improper in the Southern District.
Marut Panchitkaew and the defendants, Blue Ridge Beverage Company, Inc. and Carlsberg Group. The action was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York; the court did not decide the underlying injury claim.
What happened
In Panchitkaew v. Blue Ridge Beverage Company, Inc., Marut Panchitkaew, representing himself, sued Blue Ridge Beverage Company, Inc. and Carlsberg Group. He claimed that an oversized beer can lacked a warning and injured his toe when he tried to open it.
The case was filed in the Southern District of New York under diversity jurisdiction. The court found that the alleged events occurred in Levittown, Nassau County, and that the case belonged in the Eastern District of New York, where Nassau County is located.
Judge Colleen McMahon transferred the action to the Eastern District of New York under the federal venue-transfer law, closed the Southern District case, and denied permission to appeal without paying fees. The court did not decide whether the injury claim was valid.
The detailed version
- Panchitkaew v. Blue Ridge Beverage Company, Inc. · No. 1:19-cv-09753
- Colleen McMahon
- Nov. 26, 2019
Background
Marut Panchitkaew, who was representing himself, brought a product-liability action against Blue Ridge Beverage Company, Inc. and Carlsberg Group. The opinion says he invoked diversity jurisdiction. He alleged that the defendants sold oversized, 32-ounce beer cans without a warning that the cans could cause bodily injury.
Panchitkaew alleged that on October 18, 2019, he bought a can from a local retailer and dropped it on his toe while trying to open it. He said the toe broke or fractured, caused pain for more than two months, and would not return to its prior shape. The complaint included a medical report from CityMD Levittown stating that he visited a doctor on March 4, 2019.
Venue
The court explained that federal law generally permits a civil action to be filed where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, if neither applies, where a defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction. The court found that Panchitkaew did not allege that either defendant resided in the Southern District of New York or that the events giving rise to his claims occurred there. It therefore concluded that venue was not proper in that district.
The court also considered transfer for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. It noted that the alleged injury occurred in Levittown, where Panchitkaew resides, and that Levittown is in Nassau County, within the Eastern District of New York. The court concluded that venue was proper in the Eastern District and that the total circumstances supported transfer.
Disposition
Judge Colleen McMahon ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The order stated that a summons would not issue from the Southern District of New York and that the order closed that case. The court did not rule on the merits of Panchitkaew’s design-defect claim. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.