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, )

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