ng by a preponderance of the evidence that transfer is necessary. In re Charles Schwab & Co. Sec. Litig.. 69 F.Supp.2d 734, 735 (D.Vi.1999) (citing Shutte v. Armco Steel Corp., 431 F.2d 22, 25 (3d Cir. 1970)). Although a trial judge is afforded great discretion in deciding this motion, he or she should not disturb a plaint

ng by a preponderance of the evidence that transfer is necessary. In re Charles Schwab & Co. Sec. Litig., 69 F.Supp.2d 734, 735 (D.Vi.1999) (citing Shutte v. Armco Steel Corp. 431 F.2d 22, 25 (3d Cir. 1970)). Although a trial judge is afforded great discretion in deciding this motion, he or she should not disturb a plainti

y a preponderance of the evidence that transfer is necessary. In re Charles Schwab & Co. Sec. Litig., 69 F. Supp. 2d 734, 735 (D.V.I. 1999) (citing Shutte v. Armco Steel Corp., 431 F.2d 22, 25 (3d Cir. 1970)). Although a trial judge is afforded great discretion in deciding this motion, he or she should not disturb a plai