Berger v. Grace Line, Inc., Civ. A. No. 68-2495.

Decision Date04 February 1972
Docket NumberCiv. A. No. 68-2495.
PartiesHarry E. BERGER v. GRACE LINE, INC.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Harry E. Berger, pro se.

E. Alfred Smith, Krusen, Evans & Byrne, Philadelphia, Pa., for defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

HAROLD K. WOOD, District Judge.

Plaintiff, a seaman proceeding pro se, has moved for a change of venue to the Eastern District of New York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404. In support of his motion he states that he resides in New York and that all witnesses and records are located in New York. For reasons hereinafter stated, plaintiff's motion will be denied.

There is some question as to whether a plaintiff who voluntarily chooses his forum may move for a change of venue under § 1404. See e. g. Trader v. Pope & Talbot, Inc. v. Jarka Corp. of Phila., 190 F.Supp. 282 (E.D.Pa.1961); Philip Carey Mfg. Co. v. Taylor, 286 F.2d 782 (6th Cir. 1961), cert. den. 366 U.S. 948, 81 S.Ct. 1903, 6 L.Ed.2d 1242 (1961). A plaintiff has been allowed to change his forum where he later discovers good reasons for a transfer. Carey, supra. In this case we find no change in circumstances sufficient to warrant a change of venue.

Furthermore this case is three years old and is at the top of our trial list. A transfer at this late date would, we think, cause substantial delay and inconvenience. On the other hand plaintiff does not allege that he will be unduly inconvenienced by litigating his case in this forum.

Finally, subsequent to the filing of plaintiff's motion defendant has moved to enforce a settlement, alleging that plaintiff entered into a binding settlement agreement. That motion presently awaits plaintiff's answer. Under all of the above circumstances we conclude that a change of venue is inappropriate.

ON PETITION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

Presently before the Court is defendant's petition to enforce a settlement agreement. Plaintiff instituted suit to recover for injuries sustained aboard the SS SANTA MARIA in December, 1967. On September 13, 1971 plaintiff's counsel sought leave to withdraw from the case, alleging that plaintiff had been uncooperative and refused to accept counsel's advice. We granted counsel's motion for leave to withdraw.

On October 21, 1971, plaintiff, acting on his own behalf, and defendant commenced settlement negotiations at defendant's office in New York. These negotiations culminated in a written agreement, signed by plaintiff, providing that defendant would pay plaintiff $4,000.00 in return for a release of plaintiff's claims. Thereafter defendant's representative tendered to plaintiff a check for $4,000.00. Plaintiff refused tender and expressed a concern that his former counsel would assert a claim against a portion of the proceeds. Defendant...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Pennsylvania Ass'n, Ret'd Child. v. Commonwealth of Pa.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • May 5, 1972
    ...See Kelly v. Greer, 365 F.2d 669 (3rd Cir. 1966), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 1035, 87 S.Ct. 772, 17 L. Ed.2d 682 (1967); Berger v. Grace Line Inc., 343 F.Supp. 755 (E.D.Pa.1972). On this basis, we issued the Injunction to insure that all school districts and intermediate units in the Commonweal......
  • Read v. Baker
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Delaware
    • September 12, 1977
    ...1967). Such a settlement is enforceable summarily, upon motion, by a district court in a case pending before it. Berger v. Grace Line, Inc., 343 F.Supp. 755, 756 (E.D.Pa.1972), aff'd 474 F.2d 1339 (C.A. 3, 1973); Aro Corp. v. Allied Witan Co., 531 F.2d 1368, 1372 (C.A. 6, 1976); Meeting & E......
  • Morris v. Gaspero
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • July 28, 1981
    ...court before whom a case is pending may enforce a settlement agreement voluntarily entered into by the parties. Berger v. Grace Line, Inc., 343 F.Supp. 755, 756 (E.D.Pa.1972), aff'd, 474 F.2d 1339 (3d Cir. 1973); Aro Corp. v. Allied Witan Co., 531 F.2d 1368, 1372 (6th Cir. 1976); Meetings &......
  • Boyd v. Larco-Industrial Painting Corporation, FS-71-C-60.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas
    • April 9, 1973
    ...to the oral settlement agreement would not in any wise affect the validity of said oral agreement.'" In Berger v. Grace Line, Inc., (E.D. Pa.1971) 343 F.Supp. 755, at page 756, the court in disposing of a petition to enforce a settlement agreement "A trial court has the authority to enforce......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT