Hensley v. Farmers Insurance Exchange et al

Filing 3

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 11/21/14 ORDERING that this case is TRANSFERRED to the Central District of California.(Dillon, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GARY LEE HENSLEY, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 No. 2:14-cv-1754 MCE DAD PS v. ORDER CITY OF LOS ANGELES, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 Plaintiff, Gary Hensley, is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was referred to the 17 18 undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff has 19 filed a complaint and has requested leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 20 1915. 21 The allegations of plaintiff’s complaint, however, reveal that both plaintiff and the named 22 defendants reside in either Ventura County, California, or Los Angeles County, and that the 23 events alleged in plaintiff’s complaint also occurred in those counties. Venue in a civil action is 24 proper in (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same 25 State in which the district is located, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events 26 or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant is 27 subject to personal jurisdiction at the time the action is commenced, if there is no district in which 28 the action may otherwise be brought. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 1 1 Here, the complaint alleges that the events giving rise to this action took place in Ventura 2 County, California, and Los Angeles County, California, which is also where the named 3 defendants reside and are located. This action, therefore, should have been brought in the United 4 States District Court for the Central District of California, since Ventura County and Los Angeles 5 County are within the boundaries of that district. In the interests of justice, this action will be 6 transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California for further 7 proceedings, including a ruling on plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and the 8 screening of plaintiff’s complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). 9 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that this action is transferred to the United States District 10 Court for the Central District of California. 11 Dated: November 21, 2014 12 13 14 DAD:6 Ddad1\orders.pro se\hensley1754.transfer.ord.docx 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?