Braun v. City of Reading et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM OPINION re 2 Complaint. Signed by Judge Richard G. Andrews on 5/3/2013. (nms)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
BRENDA LEE BRAUN,
Plaintiff,
Civ. No. 13-444-RGA

v.

CITY OF READING and GOLDEN
BOWL RESTAURANT OWNER,
Defendants.

Brenda Lee Braun, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Pro Se Plaintiff.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

j ,

May
2013
Wilmington, Delaware

I
I

I~
. District Judge:

Plaintiff Brenda Lee Braun filed this action seeking damages as a result of a slip
and fall. She appears pro se and has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis
(D. I. 4). The Court proceeds to review and screen the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2).
Plaintiff alleges that she was injured in Reading, Pennsylvania when she slipped
and fell on the sidewalk outside the Golden Bowl Restaurant. Plaintiff was a citizen of
the State of Delaware at the time she filed the Complaint (she now resides in
Pennsylvania); Defendants are citizens of the State of Pennsylvania; and Plaintiff
alleges damages in the amount of $80,000. Hence, the requisites for diversity
jurisdiction are met. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
The case, however, is not properly venued in this district. In a civil action, venue
is proper only in: (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants
reside in the same state; (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 of the action is situated; or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be
found, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought. See 28
U.S.C. § 1391(b). Here, both Defendants reside in Pennsylvania and the events giving
rise to the claim occurred in Pennsylvania.
Where a plaintiff brings a case in the wrong venue, the court must either dismiss
the case or "transfer [it] to any district or division in which it could have been brought" "if
it be in the interest of justice .... " 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The court may transfer a case
pursuant to § 1406(a) either upon motion by the defendant or sua sponte. See Lafferty

v. St. Riel, 495 F.3d 72, 74-75, 75 n.3 (3d Cir. 2007) (leaving undisturbed the district
court's sua sponte transfer of a case pursuant to§ 1406(a)); Decker v. Dyson, 165 F.
App'x 951, 954 n.3 (3d Cir. 2006) ("Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), a district court, upon a
motion or sua sponte, may transfer a case to a court of proper jurisdiction when such a
transfer is in the interest of justice.")
Having considered all of the factors governing venue, 1 the Court will order the
transfer of the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania as venue is proper there.
An appropriate order will be entered.

1

See, e.g., 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which provides in relevant part that "[f]or 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." See also Calkins v. Dollar/and, Inc., 117 F. Supp. 2d 421, 428 (D. N.J. 2000)
(setting forth the factors to consider for transferring venue).

2