Franklin v. City of Fort Worth et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 5 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order, ORDER transferring action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Signed by Judge Gregory M. Sleet on 7/26/13. (cla, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE TOM FRANKLIN, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF FORTH WORTH, et aI., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) Civ. No. 13-11 OO-OMS ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM ORDER .,-'1 At Wilmington this ').b day of.:'f1 .2013; IT IS ORDERED that: (1) the pending motion for injunctive relief (D.L 5) is denied without prejudice to renew; and (2) the Clerk of Court is directed to transfer this action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Forth Worth Division, for the reasons that follow: The plaintiff, Tom Franklin ("Franklin"), who resides in Fort Worth, Texas, filed this lawsuit pursuant to the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act. (D.L 2.) He appears pro se and was granted permission to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (DJ. 4.) The action is brought against the City of Forth Worth and the City of Forth Worth Code Enforcement and seeks $10,000,000 in compensatory damages, as well as injunctive relief, in connection with alleged illegal foreclosure practices. A civil action wherein jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity of citizenship is properly brought in: "( 1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject ofthe action is situated; or (3) ifthere is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to such action." 28 U.S.c. § 1391(b). The Court may transfer a case, "[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, ... to any other district or division where it might have been brought." Id. §1404(a). The Court may raise venue and issue a Section 1404(a) transfer order sua sponte. See e.g., Arnica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Fogel, 656 F.3d 167 (3d Cir. 2011). Here, it appears that a substantial part, if not all, ofthe events or omissions giving rise to Franklin's claims occurred in Fort Worth, Texas. Fort Worth, Texas lies in Tarrant County and is within the Fort Worth Division ofthe Northern District of Texas. See 28 U.S.C. § 124(a)(2). The court considers the allegations in the complaint and finds the interests ofjustice favor transferring the action to the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas, where the defendants are located and where, based upon the allegations, it appears most of the witnesses are located. For the above reasons, the Clerk of Court is directed to transfer this action the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Forth Worth Division. The motion for injunctive relief (D.1. 5) is denied without prejudice to renew. 2