Hickman v. County of Butte et al

Filing 5

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 5/3/2013 ORDERING that this matter is TRANSFERRED to the USDC for the Northern District of California. CASE CLOSED. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CLARENCE B. HICKMAN, SR., 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. 2:13-cv-0836 KJN P vs. COUNTY OF BUTTE, et al., 14 Defendants. 15 ORDER / 16 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding without counsel or “pro se,” has filed a civil 17 rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has filed an application to proceed in forma 18 pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. 19 The federal venue statute provides that a civil action “may be brought in (1) a 20 judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in 21 which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or 22 omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of 23 the action is situated, or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as 24 provided in this action, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s 25 personal jurisdiction with respect to such action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 26 //// 1 1 In this case, the claim arose in Napa County, which is in the Northern District of 2 California.1 Therefore, plaintiff’s claim should have been filed in the United States District 3 Court for the Northern District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may 4 transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a); 5 Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974). 6 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the 7 United States District Court for the Northern District of California. 8 DATED: May 3, 2013 9 10 _____________________________________ KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 hick0836.21 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1 25 26 Although plaintiff included “County of Butte” in the caption of his complaint, he did not list the County of Butte as a defendant (dkt. no. 1 at 2.) There are no charging allegations as to the County of Butte, and the incidents upon which plaintiff’s allegations are based occurred at Napa State Hospital. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?