clear showing error in Alabama

2026Conclusion " ' "The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge." ' " Ex parte Tyson Chicken, Inc., 72 So. 3d 1, 2 (Ala. 2011) (quoting Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc., 859 So. 2d 1089, 1091 (Ala. 2002), quoting in turn Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So. 2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987)).

2023App. 2003). " 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So. 2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987).

2026Standard of Review " 'Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.' " Ex parte Jones, 414 So. 3d 86 , 88-89 (Ala. 2024) (citation omitted). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitio

2024Standard of Review "Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court." Ex parte Integon Corp., 672 So. 2d 497, 499 (Ala. 1995). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitioner makes a clear

2018"Applying the general rules to a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a ruling related to venue, this Court has held: 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue *1270 and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987). 'Our review is limited to only those facts that were before the trial court.' Ex parte Kane , 989 So.2d 509 , 511 (Ala. 2008)." Ex parte Lugo de Vega , 65

2018"Applying the general rules to a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a ruling related to venue, this Court has held: 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue *1270 and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987). 'Our review is limited to only those facts that were before the trial court.' Ex parte Kane , 989 So.2d 509 , 511 (Ala. 2008)." Ex parte Lugo de Vega , 65

2007The second issue that this court must decide is whether the circumstances of this case warrant the issuance of a writ of mandamus. “ ‘The question of proper venue for an action is determined at the commencement of the action.’ Ex parte Pratt, 815 So.2d 532, 534 (Ala.2001). ‘If venue is not proper at the commencement of an action, then, upon motion of the defendant, the action must be transferred to a court where venue would be proper.’ Ex parte Overstreet, 748 So.2d 194, 196 (Ala.1999). ‘A petition for a writ of mandamus is the appropriate means for challenging a trial court’s refusal to trans

2007The second issue that this court must decide is whether the circumstances of this case warrant the issuance of a writ of mandamus. "`The question of proper venue for an action is determined at the commencement of the action.' Ex parte Pratt , 815 So.2d 532 , 534 (Ala. 2001). `If venue is not proper at the commencement of an action, then, upon motion of the defendant, the action must be transferred to a court where venue would be proper.' Ex parte Overstreet , 748 So.2d 194 , 196 (Ala. 1999). `A petition for a writ of mandamus is the appropriate means for challenging a trial court's refusal to

2007The second issue that this court must decide is whether the circumstances of this case warrant the issuance of a writ of mandamus. “ ‘The question of proper venue for an action is determined at the commencement of the action.’ Ex parte Pratt, 815 So.2d 532, 534 (Ala.2001). ‘If venue is not proper at the commencement of an action, then, upon motion of the defendant, the action must be transferred to a court where venue would be proper.’ Ex parte Overstreet, 748 So.2d 194, 196 (Ala.1999). ‘A petition for a writ of mandamus is the appropriate means for challenging a trial court’s refusal to trans

2007The second issue that this court must decide is whether the circumstances of this case warrant the issuance of a writ of mandamus. "`The question of proper venue for an action is determined at the commencement of the action.' Ex parte Pratt , 815 So.2d 532 , 534 (Ala. 2001). `If venue is not proper at the commencement of an action, then, upon motion of the defendant, the action must be transferred to a court where venue would be proper.' Ex parte Overstreet , 748 So.2d 194 , 196 (Ala. 1999). `A petition for a writ of mandamus is the appropriate means for challenging a trial court's refusal to

2018"Applying the general rules to a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a ruling related to venue, this Court has held: 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue *1270 and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987). 'Our review is limited to only those facts that were before the trial court.' Ex parte Kane , 989 So.2d 509 , 511 (Ala. 2008)." Ex parte Lugo de Vega , 65

2018"Applying the general rules to a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging a ruling related to venue, this Court has held: 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue *1270 and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987). 'Our review is limited to only those facts that were before the trial court.' Ex parte Kane , 989 So.2d 509 , 511 (Ala. 2008)." Ex parte Lugo de Vega , 65

2026Conclusion " ' "The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge." ' " Ex parte Tyson Chicken, Inc., 72 So. 3d 1, 2 (Ala. 2011) (quoting Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc., 859 So. 2d 1089, 1091 (Ala. 2002), quoting in turn Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So. 2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987)).

2017Co., 727 So.2d 788, 789 (Ala. 1998).” Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc., 859 So.2d 1089, 1091 (Ala. 2002). “ ‘The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’” Id. (quoting Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987)).

1996"The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue, and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial court." Ex parte Ralston, 519 So.2d 488, 490 (Ala.1987).

1996“The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue, and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial court.” Ex parte Ralston, 519 So.2d 488, 490 (Ala.1987).

2003"The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge." Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987). "`The burden of proof on factual issues in a venue dispute is upon the party or parties challenging venue in the forum.' Ex parte Wiginton , 743 So.2d 1071 , 1074 (Ala. 1999)." Ex parte Jim Burke Auto., Inc. , 776 So.2d 118 , 121 (Ala. 2000).

2003“The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.” Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala.1987). “ ‘The burden of proof on factual issues in a venue dispute is upon the party or' parties challenging venue in the forum.’ Ex parte Wiginton, 743 So.2d 1071, 1074 (Ala. 1999).” Ex parte Jim Burke Auto., Inc., 776 So.2d 118, 121 (Ala.2000).

2026Standard of Review " 'Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.' " Ex parte Jones, 414 So. 3d 86 , 88-89 (Ala. 2024) (citation omitted). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitio

2024Standard of Review "Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court." Ex parte Integon Corp., 672 So. 2d 497, 499 (Ala. 1995). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitioner makes a clear

2026Standard of Review " 'Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.' " Ex parte Jones, 414 So. 3d 86 , 88-89 (Ala. 2024) (citation omitted). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitio

2024Standard of Review "Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court." Ex parte Integon Corp., 672 So. 2d 497, 499 (Ala. 1995). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitioner makes a clear

2015Moreover, ‘in mandamus proceedings, we indulge all reasonable presumptions favoring the correctness of the judgment appealed from, and the petitioner must overcome this presumption by satisfactorily countervailing evidence.’ Ex parte Boykin, 568 So.2d 1243, 1244 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). ‘[T]he writ is not to be granted unless there is a clear showing of error in the trial court.’ Ex ponte Shepherd, 560 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Ala.Civ.App.1990).” Ex parte Everest Nat’l Ins, Co., 80 So.3d 954, 956-57 (Ala.Civ.App.2011).

2014Moreover, ‘in mandamus proceedings, we indulge all reasonable presumptions favoring the correctness of the judgment appealed from, and the petitioner must overcome this presumption by satisfactorily countervailing evidence.’ Ex parte Boykin, 568 So.2d 1243, 1244 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). ‘[T]he writ is not to be granted unless there is a clear showing of error in the trial court.’ Ex parte Shepherd, 560 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Ala.Civ.App.1990).” Ex parte Everest Nat’l Ins.

2015Moreover, ‘in mandamus proceedings, we indulge all reasonable presumptions favoring the correctness of the judgment appealed from, and the petitioner must overcome this presumption by satisfactorily countervailing evidence.’ Ex parte Boykin, 568 So.2d 1243, 1244 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). ‘[T]he writ is not to be granted unless there is a clear showing of error in the trial court.’ Ex ponte Shepherd, 560 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Ala.Civ.App.1990).” Ex parte Everest Nat’l Ins, Co., 80 So.3d 954, 956-57 (Ala.Civ.App.2011).

2014Moreover, ‘in mandamus proceedings, we indulge all reasonable presumptions favoring the correctness of the judgment appealed from, and the petitioner must overcome this presumption by satisfactorily countervailing evidence.’ Ex parte Boykin, 568 So.2d 1243, 1244 (Ala.Civ.App.1990). ‘[T]he writ is not to be granted unless there is a clear showing of error in the trial court.’ Ex parte Shepherd, 560 So.2d 1089, 1090 (Ala.Civ.App.1990).” Ex parte Everest Nat’l Ins.

2010Id. "`The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring *Page 978 or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.'" " Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987)." Ex parte Scott Bridge Co. , 834 So.2d 79 , 80-81 (Ala. 2002); accord Ex parte Cavalier Home Builders, L.L.C. , 920 So.2d 1105 , 1108 (Ala.Civ.App. 2005).

2010Id. “ ‘The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’ ” “Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala.1987).” Ex parte Scott Bridge Co., 834 So.2d 79, 80-81 (Ala.2002); accord Ex parte Cavalier Home Builders, L.L.C., 920 So.2d 1105, 1108 (Ala.Civ.App.2005).

2018Co. , 727 So.2d 788 , 789 (Ala. 1998). " 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987).

2018Co. , 727 So.2d 788 , 789 (Ala. 1998). " 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987).

2024Standard of Review "Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court." 3 SC-2024-0224 Ex parte Integon Corp., 672 So. 2d 497, 499 (Ala. 1995). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitione

2024Standard of Review "Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ, to be issued only where there is (1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; (2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; (3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and (4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court." Ex parte Integon Corp., 672 So. 2d 497, 499 (Ala. 1995). " 'A trial court's denial of a motion to transfer based on improper venue is reviewable by a petition for writ of mandamus, and "such a petition is due to be granted if the petitioner makes a clear

2007The second issue that this court must decide is whether the circumstances of this case warrant the issuance of a writ of mandamus. “ ‘The question of proper venue for an action is determined at the commencement of the action.’ Ex parte Pratt, 815 So.2d 532, 534 (Ala.2001). ‘If venue is not proper at the commencement of an action, then, upon motion of the defendant, the action must be transferred to a court where venue would be proper.’ Ex parte Overstreet, 748 So.2d 194, 196 (Ala.1999). ‘A petition for a writ of mandamus is the appropriate means for challenging a trial court’s refusal to trans

2007The second issue that this court must decide is whether the circumstances of this case warrant the issuance of a writ of mandamus. "`The question of proper venue for an action is determined at the commencement of the action.' Ex parte Pratt , 815 So.2d 532 , 534 (Ala. 2001). `If venue is not proper at the commencement of an action, then, upon motion of the defendant, the action must be transferred to a court where venue would be proper.' Ex parte Overstreet , 748 So.2d 194 , 196 (Ala. 1999). `A petition for a writ of mandamus is the appropriate means for challenging a trial court's refusal to

1983In Harrington Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company, Inc. , 414 So.2d 74 (Ala. 1982), the Court, in denying a writ of mandamus to a lower court which had refused to grant a motion to transfer venue, stated: "The writ of mandamus is not granted unless there is a clear showing of error in the trial court to the injury of the petitioner, Ex parte Slade , Ala., 382 So.2d 1127 (1980).

1983In Harrington Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Ford Motor Company, Inc., 414 So.2d 74 (Ala.1982), the Court, in denying a writ of mandamus to a lower court which had refused to grant a motion to transfer venue, stated: “The writ of mandamus is not granted unless there is a clear showing of error in the trial court to the injury of the petitioner, Ex parte Slade, Ala., 382 So.2d 1127 (1980).

2010Id. “ ‘The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’ “Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala.1987).” Ex parte Scott Bridge Co., 834 So.2d 79, 80-81 (Ala.2002); accord Ex parte Siemag, Inc., 53 So.3d 974, 977-78 (Ala.Civ.App.2010).

2010Id. “ ‘The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’ ” “Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala.1987).” Ex parte Scott Bridge Co., 834 So.2d 79, 80-81 (Ala.2002); accord Ex parte Cavalier Home Builders, L.L.C., 920 So.2d 1105, 1108 (Ala.Civ.App.2005).

2016“A writ of mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary writ and will not be issued unless the petitioner has a clear and undisputable right to a particular result.” Ex parte Springer, 619 So.2d 1267, 1268 (Ala.1992). “ ‘A writ of mandamus is not granted unless there is a clear showing of error in the trial court-to the injury of the petitioner.’ ” Ex parte Hutcherson, 847 So.2d 386, 388 (Ala.2002) (quoting Ex parte Southland Bank, 514 So.2d 954, 955 (Ala.1987)).

2003Ex parte Slade, 382 So.2d 1127 (Ala.1980).’ Ex parte Southland Bank, 514 So.2d 954 (Ala.1987).” Ex parte Hutcherson, 847 So.2d 386, 387 (Ala.2002)(emphasis added).

2001See Ex parte Wiginton , 743 So.2d 1071 , 1074 (Ala. 1999) ("The burden of proof on factual issues in a venue dispute is upon the party or parties challenging venue in the forum."); see also Ex parte City of Fayette , 611 So.2d 1032 , 1033 (Ala. 1992) ("The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue, and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer a case, a writ of mandamus will not be issued except upon a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.").

2001See Ex parte Wiginton, 743 So.2d 1071, 1074 (Ala.1999) (“The burden of proof on factual issues in a venue dispute is upon the party or parties challenging venue in the forum.”); see also Ex parte City of Fayette, 611 So.2d 1032, 1033 (Ala.1992) (“The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue, and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer a case, a writ of mandamus will not be issued except upon a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.”).

2000"Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary remedy, which should be granted only when there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial court." Norwood , 615 So.2d at 1212 .

2000"Mandamus is a drastic and extraordinary remedy, which should be granted only when there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial court." Norwood, 615 So.2d at 1212 .

2017Co. , 775 So.2d 153 , 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates , 675 So.2d 371 , 374 (Ala. 1996) ); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc. , 746 So.2d 960 , 962 (Ala. 1999)." Ex parte Children's Hosp. of Alabama , 931 So.2d 1 , 5-6 (Ala. 2005). " 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987)." Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc. , 859 So.2d 1089 , 1091

2017Co., 775 So.2d 153, 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates, 675 So.2d 371, 374 (Ala. 1996)); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc., 746 So.2d 960, 962 (Ala. 1999).” Ex parte Children’s Hosp. of Alabama, 931 So.2d 1, 5-6 (Ala. 2005). “‘The burden of proving improper venue is. on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’ Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987).

2017Co. , 775 So.2d 153 , 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates , 675 So.2d 371 , 374 (Ala. 1996) ); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc. , 746 So.2d 960 , 962 (Ala. 1999)." Ex parte Children's Hosp. of Alabama , 931 So.2d 1 , 5-6 (Ala. 2005). " 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987)." Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc. , 859 So.2d 1089 , 1091

2017Co., 775 So.2d 153, 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates, 675 So.2d 371, 374 (Ala. 1996)); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc., 746 So.2d 960, 962 (Ala. 1999).” Ex parte Children’s Hosp. of Alabama, 931 So.2d 1, 5-6 (Ala. 2005). “‘The burden of proving improper venue is. on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’ Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987).

2017Co. , 775 So.2d 153 , 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates , 675 So.2d 371 , 374 (Ala. 1996) ); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc. , 746 So.2d 960 , 962 (Ala. 1999)." Ex parte Children's Hosp. of Alabama , 931 So.2d 1 , 5-6 (Ala. 2005). " 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987)." Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc. , 859 So.2d 1089 , 1091

2017Co., 775 So.2d 153, 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates, 675 So.2d 371, 374 (Ala. 1996)); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc., 746 So.2d 960, 962 (Ala. 1999).” Ex parte Children’s Hosp. of Alabama, 931 So.2d 1, 5-6 (Ala. 2005). “‘The burden of proving improper venue is. on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’ Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987).

2017Co. , 775 So.2d 153 , 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates , 675 So.2d 371 , 374 (Ala. 1996) ); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc. , 746 So.2d 960 , 962 (Ala. 1999)." Ex parte Children's Hosp. of Alabama , 931 So.2d 1 , 5-6 (Ala. 2005). " 'The burden of proving improper venue is on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.' Ex parte Finance America Corp. , 507 So.2d 458 , 460 (Ala. 1987)." Ex parte Pike Fabrication, Inc. , 859 So.2d 1089 , 1091

2017Co., 775 So.2d 153, 156 (Ala. 2000) (quoting Ex parte Gates, 675 So.2d 371, 374 (Ala. 1996)); Ex parte Pfizer, Inc., 746 So.2d 960, 962 (Ala. 1999).” Ex parte Children’s Hosp. of Alabama, 931 So.2d 1, 5-6 (Ala. 2005). “‘The burden of proving improper venue is. on the party raising the issue and on review of an order transferring or refusing to transfer, a writ of mandamus will not be granted unless there is a clear showing of error on the part of the trial judge.’ Ex parte Finance America Corp., 507 So.2d 458, 460 (Ala. 1987).