of California. This provision is the statutory codification of the common law doctrine of forum non conveniens. Section 1404(a) states, “For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.” The standard for transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) leaves much to the broad discretion of the trial court, and once a trial judge decides that transfer of venue is justified for the convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice, the ruling can be overturned only for clear abuse of discretion, and the presumption in favor of the district court judge is heavy. See Brown v. Connecticut Gen. Life Ins. Co., 934 F.2d 1193, 1197 (11th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Congress authorized courts to transfer the
holding trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling based only on affidavits holding that trial court did not abuse discretion in transferring case that would impose financial hardship on a party no matter where heard holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to disqualify an attorney based on a matter not raised by the opposing party until only weeks prior to trial holding that trial court abused its discretion in not transferring venue to alternative county holding that trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing collateral source testimony when plaintiff testified generally about financial hardship caused by injury