Legal Opinion · Dissent

Beaven v. McAnulty

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided November 25, 1998No. 98-SC-140-MRPublished

1DissentWintersheimer, Justice

I must respectfiilly dissent from the majority opinion because I believe that existing precedent requires that venue decisions are not reviewable by means of an extraordinary writ and that the denial of such a writ of prohibition or mandamus by the Court of Appeals should be affirmed.

Skidmore v. Meade, Ky., 676 S.W.2d 793 (1984), correctly determined that a decision to transfer a ease on the grounds of forum non conveniens is not reviewable by a writ of mandamus.

The granting of mandamus is discretionary, and ordinarily is not available to question venue for the reasons that the remedy by…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pettit v. RaikesKentucky Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Fischer v. State Board of ElectionsKentucky Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Skidmore ex rel. Skidmore v. MeadeKentucky Supreme Court · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API