-
L. HAND, Chief Judge (concurring).
I wish to put my vote solely upon the ground that § 15 of Title 15 U.S.C.A. gives to a plaintiff a privilege which a defendant must overcome by more than a bare balance of convenience between the two forums. If I thought that we had before us an unweighted choice between New York and Detroit, based upon that consideration, I should choose Detroit; indeed, I should think it a clear abuse of discretion to hold otherwise. However, as I understand it, the privilege granted by § 15 still counts In the scale; a defendant must do more than show that the transfer will on the whole make the trial more convenient; it must make the trial markedly more convenient. It does not trouble me that I cannot say how much more that must be; we are often faced with indeterminate and indeterminable standards: reasonable notice, reasonable cause, gross negligence, the requisite proof in fraud or in a criminal prosecution. Much of life depends upon such choices, and he is a pedant who thinks otherwise. Tn the case at bar I am not persuaded that the. balance of convenience is strong enough to declare “clearly erroneous” the finding of the district judge that the defendants have not overcome the handicap of § 15.
Document Info
Docket Number: 21601_1
Citation Numbers: 182 F.2d 329, 1950 U.S. App. LEXIS 2791
Judges: Hand, Swan, Frank
Filed Date: 5/8/1950
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/4/2024