MARVIN MANDEL, Governor                                 223

was intended to give Maryland courts
jurisdiction to the full extent permitted by

the Constitution. Van Wagenberg v. Van

Wagenberg, 241 Md. 154 (1966).

The only other changes made are in style.

SEC. 6-104. STAY OR DISMISSAL OF ACTION WHICH SHOULD
BE HEARD IN ANOTHER [[FORM]] FORUM.

IF A COURT FINDS THAT IN THE INTEREST OF
SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AN ACTION SHOULD BE HEARD IN
ANOTHER [[FORM]] FORUM, THE COURT MAY STAY OR DISMISS
THE ACTION IN WHOLE OR IN PAST ON ANY CONDITIONS IT
CONSIDERS JUST.

REVISOR'S NOTE: This section presently appears as
Art. 75, §98.

The section is probably unnecessary in a
technical sense, as the common law doctrine
of forum non conveniens is well established.
The section is retained, however, to avoid
the appearance of change.

The only other changes made are in style.
SUBTITLE 2. VENUE.
SEC. 6-201. GENERAL RULE.

(A)   IN GENERAL.

SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF §§ 6-202 AND 6-203
AND UNLESS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY LAW, A CIVIL ACTION
SHALL BE BROUGHT IN A COUNTY WHERE THE DEFENDANT
RESIDES, CARRIES ON A REGULAR BUSINESS, IS EMPLOYED,
OR HABITUALLY ENGAGES IN A VOCATION. IN ADDITION, A
CORPORATION ALSO MAY BE SUED WHERE IT MAINTAINS ITS
PRINCIPAL OFFICES IN THE STATE.

(B)   MULTIPLE DEFENDANTS.

IF THERE IS WORE THAN ONE DEFENDANT, AND THERE IS
NO SINGLE VENUE APPLICABLE TO ALL DEFENDANTS, UNDER
SUBSECTION (A), ALL MAY BE SUED IN A COUNTY IN WHICH
ANY ONE OF THEM COULD BE SUED, OR IN THE COUNTY WHERE
THE CAUSE OF ACTION AROSE.

REVISOR'S NOTE: This title is organized
pragmatically, with §6—201 covering all