Paraphrasing Robert Kennedy, the long march to justice starts when reasonable people: (a) see the world for what it is; (b) recognize where injustices in the order of things lie; (c) have the courage to call out an injustice when it is identified; and (d) have the wherewithal to see necessary change through to fruition. There is a dire need for reasonable people in our state to join forces in order to rectify the patent injustice inherent in the laws governing how a plaintiff’s choice of venue may be challenged by a defendant in civil litigation.
Under the current iteration of the law governing venue (Pa.R.C.P. 1006, as interpreted by Zappala v. Brandolini Property Management, 589 Pa. 516, 909 A.2d 1272 (Pa. 2006)), a plaintiff’s choice of venue may only be challenged as being improperly laid by preliminary objection and, if it is not so challenged, or if it is challenged and the preliminary objections are overruled, venue may never be again raised by a defendant, regardless of what facts (or the absence of facts) are learned thereafter.
