MARTIN v. CORE SECURITY SOLUTIONS,INC
Judge George A. OToole, Jr: ORDER entered granting 17 Motion to Change Venue (Halley, Taylor) [Transferred from Massachusetts on 4/21/2016.]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT COURT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-11902-GAO
CIVIL ACTION NO. 15-12328-GAO
CORE SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.,
April 20, 2016
In these two related actions, Richard Martin claims that while he was standing in the lobby
of a McDonald’s restaurant in Washington, D.C., Deandre A. Harris, a special police officer
employed by Core Security Solutions, Inc., harassed him, ordered him to leave the restaurant,
assaulted him despite his compliance with Harris’s directive, and transferred him to the custody of
the local police department which falsely charged him with assaulting a police officer and kept
him in custody overnight. 1
Martin’s related suit against Harris was dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution.
Martin v. Harris, C.A. 15-12329-GAO (D. Mass. Mar. 22, 2016), ECF #20.
By separate motions, McDonald’s and Core Security Solutions argue that Massachusetts
is not the proper venue for these actions. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391. The Court agrees. The events
giving rise to Martin’s claims occurred exclusively in Washington, D.C. Core Security Solutions
appears to be a resident of Maryland, just outside of Washington, D.C., and appears to have no
presence within this District. Furthermore, although Martin lives in Massachusetts, the remaining
relevant witnesses, such as employees and patrons of McDonald’s and members of the Metro
Police Department, are likely to live in the Washington, D.C. area. Similarly, any relevant
documents are likely to be located there.
Consequently, the defendants’ motions, insofar as they request a transfer of venue, are
GRANTED, and the cases are TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the District
of Columbia. See id. § 1406(a).
It is SO ORDERED.
/s/ George A. O’Toole, Jr.
United States District Judge
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?