Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP v. TRG Global Corp.

OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP (“Schlam Stone”) brings this action against Defendant TRG Global Corporation (“TRG”), invoking the Court’s diversity jurisdiction. Schlam Stone seeks to recover unpaid attorney’s fees from TRG, a former client, in a collection action. Before the Court is TRG’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or, in the alternative, to transfer venue to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1391 and 1404(a). For the reasons that follow, the motion to transfer is granted. I. Background A. Factual Background Unless otherwise noted, the following facts, which are presumed true for purposes of this motion, are drawn from Schlam Stone’s Complaint. (ECF No. 9 (“Compl.”).) Defendant TRG is a Florida corporation with a principal place of business, according to TRG, in Virginia. (See id. 9; ECF No. 26 at 2; ECF No. 31 at 3.) Plaintiff Schlam Stone is a limited liability partnership organized under New York law, with its principal place of business in New York. (Compl. 8.) In September 2022, TRG retained Schlam Stone to represent it in litigation against a former TRG client, CodeMantra, in the Eastern District of Virginia. (Id.

3, 13.) In this representation, Schlam Stone dealt exclusively with Donna Roberson, TRG’s chairperson. (Id. 2.) At the outset of their relationship, the parties negotiated a retainer agreement, including discounted hourly rates for Schlam Stone’s attorneys. (Id.