By Rachel S. Silverman
Plaintiffs Megan Roe and Jane Doe filed suit against Thomas C. Horne, Arizona’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction; The Gregory School; Arizona Interscholastic Association, Inc.; the Kyrene School District; and Laura Toenjes, the Superintendent of Kyrene School District, collectively the Defendants. The Plaintiffs argued that A.R.S. § 15-120.02 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, Title IX, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. A.R.S. § 15-120.02 prohibits transgender girls from participating in an athletic team or sport designated as female, women, or girls.
Roe is a fifteen-year-old transgender girl residing in Pima County and attends The Gregory School, a private middle and high school in Tucson, Arizona. Roe intended to try out for the girls’ volleyball team. Doe is an eleven-year-old transgender girl who attends Kyrene Aprende Middle School in Chandler, Arizona, and planned to try out for the girls’ soccer, cross country, and basketball teams. Under the A.R.S. § 15-120.02, neither of the girls can try out or participate on the girls’ teams because they are transgender. Roe and Doe are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.
However, Defendant Horne filed a Motion to Transfer, requesting the Court transfer the case to the Phoenix Division because he felt it was the most convenient. Plaintiffs, who chose the Tucson Division, opposed the motion. Plaintiffs argued the convenience of the parties, witnesses, and interests of justice do not warrant transfer. The Gregory School also opposed the transfer, explaining Phoenix is not more convenient for the parties or witnesses than Tucson.
When determining a motion to transfer, the Court considers the following factors: “(1) the location where the relevant agreements were negotiated and executed; (2) the state that is most familiar with the governing law; (3) the plaintiff’s choice of forum; (4) the respective parties’ contacts with the forum; (5) the contacts relating to the plaintiff’s cause of action in the chosen forum; (6) the differences in the costs of litigation in the two forums; (7) the availability of compulsory process to compel attendance of unwilling non-party witnesses; and (8) the ease of access to sources of proof” (Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 2000).
The Court concluded the first and seventh factors were irrelevant because Tucson and Phoenix are equally familiar with Arizona law. Also, a district judge in Tucson has the same power to issue a subpoena as a district judge in Phoenix. For the third factor, the Plaintiffs chose the Tucson division, and a plaintiff’s choice of home forum should be given preference. The fourth and fifth factors do not lead to a transfer because Roe and Defendant The Gregory School have significant contacts within the Tucson Division, and Defendants Horne and the Arizona Interscholastic Association, Inc. serve residents of the entire state of Arizona. Defendant Horne stated the sixth and eighth factors should apply because most potential witnesses, counsel, and relevant documents are located closer to Phoenix, and consequently, it will be less expensive and easier to access sources of proof. However, Defendant The Gregory School disagreed with Horne’s statement. The Gregory School explained discovery is likely to be conducted electronically. If conducted in person, the deposition of Phoenix witnesses will be in Phoenix and Tucson witnesses in Tucson, as would occur in any other case. The Court agreed and found the sixth and eighth factors do not merit transfer.
The Court concluded Defendant Horne did not show that the Phoenix Division is more convenient than the Tucson Division. The Phoenix Division would be more inconvenient for the Plaintiffs because the Plaintiffs are minors. Therefore, the Court denied Defendant Horne’s Motion to Transfer.
References
Doe v. Horne, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93224 *; 2023 WL 3687785
Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 211 F. 3d 495, 498-99 (9th Cir. 2000)
Rachel Silverman is an Assistant Professor for the Sports Management Program in the Kinesiology and Sport Sciences Department at the University of Nebraska Kearney. She is a doctoral student (ABD) at Troy University. Her research agenda focuses on women in sports, including legal, sociological, and ethical aspects of sports management.
