Douglas v. Palmer et al
Filing
4
ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Western District of Michigan. Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DPer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
LEON DOUGLAS, #132125,
Plaintiff,
v.
CASE NO. 2:14-CV-14961
HONORABLE PAUL D. BORMAN
CARMEN PALMER, ET AL.,
Defendants.
_______________________________/
ORDER OF TRANSFER
Before the Court is Plaintiff Leon Douglas’ pro se civil rights complaint brought
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as his application to proceed without prepayment of
costs and fees and a motion to consider his filing as timely. Plaintiff is a state prisoner
currently confined at the Thumb Correctional Facility in Lapeer, Michigan. The events
giving rise to this action occurred while Plaintiff was confined at the Michigan
Reformatory in Ionia, Michigan. Plaintiff alleges that the defendants, Warden Palmer,
Lieutenants Muzzin and Martin, and Resident Unit Manager Gobert – employees at
Michigan Reformatory – improperly confiscated his medically-prescribed shoes and
failed to provide him with proper hearings on the matter. He asserts that the defendants
violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, were
deliberately indifferent to his medical needs, and violated his rights to due process and
equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment and the Americans with Disabilities
Act. Plaintiff sues the defendants in their official and individual capacities and seeks
injunctive relief and monetary damages.
Having reviewed the complaint, the Court concludes that venue is improper in this
Court and that the case should be transferred to the United States District Court for the
Western District of Michigan, Southern Division.
Venue for a civil action brought in federal court is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
Section 1391(b) provides:
Venue in general. 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
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 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). Public officials “reside” in the county where they perform their
official duties. O'Neill v. Battisti, 472 F.2d 789, 791 (6th Cir. 1972).
When venue is improper, a district court may either dismiss the case or, in the
interests of justice, transfer the case to a district or division where it could have been
brought. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Additionally, even when venue is proper, a district
court may transfer a civil action to any other district where it might have been brought for
2
the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 1404(a). A court may sua sponte transfer a case for improper venue. Carver v. Knox
County, Tenn., 887 F.2d 1287, 1291 (6th Cir. 1989); see also Cosmichrome, Inc. v.
Spectra Chrome, Inc. LLC, 504 F. App’x 468, 472 (6th Cir. 2012); Flynn v. Greg
Anthony Construct. Co., Inc., 95 F. App’x 726, 738 (6th Cir. 2003).
In this case, the defendants reside in Ionia, Michigan and the actions giving rise to
the complaint occurred there. Ionia, Michigan lies in Ionia County, which is located in
the Southern Division of the Western District of Michigan. See 28 U.S.C. § 102(b)(1).
Venue is therefore proper in the United States District Court for the Western District of
Michigan, Southern Division, not this Court.
Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) and in the interests of justice, the
Court orders the Clerk of the Court to transfer this case to the United States District Court
for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division. The Court makes no
determination as to the merits of the complaint, the application to proceed without
prepayment of fees and costs, or the motion to consider the filing as timely.
s/Paul D. Borman
PAUL D. BORMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: January 14, 2015
3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each
attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on January
14, 2015.
s/Deborah Tofil
Case Manager
4
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?