McClamrock v. Eli Lilly and Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the public interest favored transfer to North Carolina given that North Carolina law “most likely” controlled the suit
• concluding that the plaintiff had not demonstrated how the conduct of government officials would be relevant to proving his claims, and thus there was no reason for the action to remain in the District of Columbia
• finding the action would require application of substantive North Carolina law, which favors transferring to North Carolina because North Carolina courts have the greatest familiarity with local law
• “The location of counsel carries little, if any, weight in an analysis under § 1404(a).” (internal quotation omitted)
• “How plaintiff realistically believes he will be able to prove these elements of damages without the testimony of the health care professionals who have treated him . . . is beyond this Court's comprehension.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).