19CV03844
MLYNAR v. CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE AUTHORITY et al
PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE
Plaintiff Janet Mlynar’s Renewed Motion for Change of Venue is denied.
This Complaint was filed January 18, 2019 in Napa County Superior Court and moved,
via motion by Defendant Cook, to Santa Cruz County Superior Court in December 2019.
Plaintiff Mlynar’s Motion for Change of venue was originally filed May 4, 2022. The Court
denied her motion without prejudice. Plaintiff now brings a renewed motion for transfer of venue
back to Napa.
Code of Civil Procedure section 397(c) grants the court discretionary power to transfer a
case to any other county “when the convenience of the witnesses and the ends of justice would
be promoted by the change.” It is only the convenience of the nonparty witnesses that is
important. Absent extraordinary circumstances, the parties’ convenience is not considered-even
if they are to testify. (Weil & Brown Civ. Pro. Before Tr
Hearing Date
June 06, 2023
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
19CV03844
MLYNAR v. CALIFORNIA EARTHQUAKE AUTHORITY et al
PLAINTIFF’S RENEWED MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE
Plaintiff Janet Mlynar’s Renewed Motion for Change of Venue is denied.
This Complaint was filed January 18, 2019 in Napa County Superior Court and moved,
via motion by Defendant Cook, to Santa Cruz County Superior Court in December 2019.
Plaintiff Mlynar’s Motion for Change of venue was originally filed May 4, 2022. The Court
denied her motion without prejudice. Plaintiff now brings a renewed motion for transfer of venue
back to Napa.
Code of Civil Procedure section 397(c) grants the court discretionary power to transfer a
case to any other county “when the convenience of the witnesses and the ends of justice would
be promoted by the change.” It is only the convenience of the nonparty witnesses that is
important. Absent extraordinary circumstances, the parties’ convenience is not considered-even
if they are to testify. (Weil & Brown Civ. Pro. Before Tr