## Facts

- Jules Pfeiffer, an Illinois resident, filed two breach-of-contract actions in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
- Pfeiffer sued five defendants who were diverse from him for jurisdictional purposes.
- The claims arose from an agreement connected to producing a play in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
- Four defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3), arguing improper venue and also contesting personal jurisdiction.
- In the alternative, the moving defendants asked the court to transfer the case to another federal district.

## Issues

1. Whether venue was proper in the Northern District of Illinois for Pfeiffer’s breach-of-contract claims under the federal venue statute applicable to diversity cases.
2. Whether the Northern District of Illinois could exercise personal jurisdiction over the out-of-state defendants based on the contract-related contacts tied to Illinois.
3. If dismissal was not warranted, whether the case should be transferred to another district for convenience or in the interest of justice.

## Decision

- The court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss for improper venue.
- The court concluded that the case could proceed in the Northern District of Illinois, rejecting the defendants’ venue challenge and associated personal-jurisdiction objections.
- The court declined to grant the defendants’ alternative request to transfer the action to another district.

## Legal Principles

- In a diversity contract action, venue may be proper in any district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred; more than one district can qualify.
- For contract claims, courts commonly look to where the agreement was to be performed and where the alleged breach was felt, including where payment or other performance was to be directed.
- A defendant’s contract-based contacts with the forum—when the contract contemplates performance directed to the forum—can support personal jurisdiction consistent with due process.
- Even when another forum is available, transfer is discretionary and depends on convenience and the interests of justice; the moving party bears the burden to justify transfer.

## Conclusion

Pfeiffer v. Insty Prints involved two diversity breach-of-contract suits stemming from an agreement to produce a play in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. After four defendants challenged venue and personal jurisdiction and sought transfer as an alternative, the Northern District of Illinois refused to dismiss, determined the case could proceed in Illinois, and declined to transfer it to another district.


Pfeiffer v. Insty Prints, No. 93 C 2937 (1993)