Reed-Bey v. Michigan Department of Corrections et al
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Western District of Michigan. Signed by District Judge Patrick J. Duggan. (DPer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
CASE NO. 2:14-CV-13616
HON. PATRICK J. DUGGAN
OF CORRECTIONS and KEEFE
ORDER TRANSFERRING PLAINTIFF’S CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT
TO THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
Plaintiff Mark Reed-Bey, a Michigan prisoner presently confined at the
Chippewa Correctional Facility in Kincheloe, Michigan, has filed a pro se civil rights
complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Complaint, which appears to seek class
certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, claims that Defendants,
the Michigan Department of Corrections (“MDOC”) and the Keefe Company, have
unconstitutionally changed the procedures for issuing prison misconducts and
increased commissary prices. For the reasons stated below, the Court transfers this
matter to the Western District of Michigan for further proceedings.
A threshold question is whether venue is proper in this District. Title 28 U.S.C.
§ 1391 provides in relevant part:
A civil action may be brought in–
(1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all
defendants are residents of the State in which the district is
(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) if there 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 conduct Plaintiff challenges in this lawsuit occurred during Plaintiff’s
incarceration at the Chippewa Correctional Facility in Chippewa County, Michigan.
Chippewa County is situated within the Western District of Michigan. 28 U.S.C.
§ 102(b)(2). Although Plaintiff seeks to represent class members in prisons located
in the Eastern District of Michigan, class certification decisions are often rendered
after courts evaluate the sufficiency of the pleadings. Putting aside the impracticalities
of a pro se prisoner representing multiple parties in various prisons throughout the
State of Michigan, Plaintiff’s desire to represent class members in prisons in the
Eastern District is the only basis this Court can discern for venue laying in this
District. Because Plaintiff has failed to allege that any of the acts, events, or
omissions which form the basis of his lawsuit took place in the Eastern District of
Michigan, venue is not proper here. See Miles v. WTMX Radio, 15 F. App’x 213, 215
(6th Cir. 2001).
Venue is proper in the Western District and the Court, therefore, transfers
Plaintiff’s Complaint there. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) (“The district court of a district
in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or
it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district of division in which it
would have been brought.”).
The Clerk of Court shall transfer this case to the United States District Court
for the Western District of Michigan pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and 1406(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 7, 2014
s/PATRICK J. DUGGAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Mark Reed-Bey, 151290
Chippewa Correctional Facility
4269 W. M-80
Kincheloe, MI 49784
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?