## Facts

- Theodore J. Thompson purchased a Greyhound Lines, Inc. ticket on March 14, 2011, for one-way travel from Pensacola, Florida, to Tunica, Mississippi.
- The ticket listed an expected arrival time in Tunica of 5:05 p.m. on March 15, 2011.
- Thompson traveled from Pensacola on a Greyhound bus and arrived in Mobile, Alabama, just after midnight.
- In Mobile, Thompson was directed to board a different bus operated by Colonial Trailways and driven by Terry Reeves.
- Reeves told Thompson the bus was going to Jackson, Mississippi, where Thompson would transfer to another bus to reach Tunica, and that Reeves’s bus would return to Mobile after stopping in Jackson.
- Thompson fell asleep, missed the stop in Jackson, and remained on the bus as it turned around and returned to Mobile.
- Thompson alleged that, because of the missed connection, he missed a court date in Tunica County, Mississippi, and was found guilty in absentia.
- Thompson sued Greyhound, Colonial, and Reeves in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, asserting state-law claims and invoking diversity jurisdiction.
- Reeves was a Florida resident.
- Greyhound moved to dismiss for improper venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).

## Issues

1. Whether venue in the Southern District of Alabama was proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) based on defendants’ residency.
2. Whether venue in the Southern District of Alabama was proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred there.
3. If venue was improper, whether the case should be dismissed or transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).

## Decision

- The court held venue was not proper in the Southern District of Alabama under § 1391(b)(1) because the defendants were not all residents of Alabama.
- The court held venue was not proper in the Southern District of Alabama under § 1391(b)(2) because the Alabama events (including the bus change in Mobile) did not amount to a substantial part of the events giving rise to Thompson’s claims.
- In the interest of justice, the court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi under § 1406(a), where venue was proper.
- Greyhound’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion was not decided and remained for the transferee court.

## Legal Principles

- Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1), venue based on residency is available in a district where any defendant resides only if all defendants are residents of the state in which that district is located.
- Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2), venue is proper only in a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred; the test is qualitative and focuses on where the claim’s material events occurred.
- When venue is challenged, the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the chosen venue is proper.
- If an action is filed in the wrong district, 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) permits transfer to a district where the action could have been brought, and transfer may be favored over dismissal when it better serves the interest of justice.
- A district court may transfer for improper venue without reaching merits arguments, leaving Rule 12(b)(6) issues to the transferee court.

## Conclusion

In *Thompson v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.*, the Southern District of Alabama concluded that venue was improper because not all defendants were Alabama residents and the Alabama portion of the trip was not a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims. Rather than dismiss, the court transferred the case to the Southern District of Mississippi under § 1406(a) and left Greyhound’s failure-to-state-a-claim arguments for the transferee court.


Thompson v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 2012 WL 6213792 (2012)