Preston v. Smith et al

Filing 4

OPINION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Western District of Michigan. Signed by District Judge Gershwin A. Drain. (DPer)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
HARVEY PRESTON,

Case No. 18-cv-10123

Plaintiff,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
GERSHWIN A. DRAIN

v.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MONA K. MAJZOUB

WILLIE SMITH ET AL.,
Defendants.
/

OPINION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING COMPLAINT TO WESTERN DISTRICT OF
MICHIGAN [1]
Plaintiff Harvey Preston, presently confined at the Ionia Maximum
Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan, filed a civil rights complaint in the
Eastern District of Michigan under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff claims that during
his incarceration at the Ionia Maximum Correctional Facility (“ICF”) the
Defendants—the warden of ICF and several ICF employees—violated his
constitutional rights. For the reasons stated below, the Court will transfer this
matter to the Western District of Michigan.
I. DISCUSSION
Venue is not proper in this Court, and the requirements of venue are satisfied
in the Western District of Michigan. Indeed, all the conduct Plaintiff complains of

transpired at the Ionia Maximum Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan, which is
located in the Western District of Michigan. Preston remains incarcerated at ICF,
and all the Defendants work at ICF.
Venue is proper in the judicial district where (1) any defendant resides, if all
defendants are residents of the same state; or (2) where the claim arose. 28 U.S.C.
§ 1391(b). “For 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 or to any district or division to which all parties have
consented.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). A court may transfer a case based on venue—
without prompting from the litigants—for the convenience of parties or witnesses.
See Schultz v. Ary, 175 F. Supp. 2d 959, 964 (W.D. Mich. 2001).
Relevant considerations for the Court regarding venue include:
(1) the convenience of witnesses; (2) the location of relevant
documents and relative ease of access to sources of proof; (3) the
convenience of the parties; (4) the locus of the operative facts; (5) the
availability of process to compel the attendance of unwilling
witnesses; (6) the relative means of the parties; (7) the forum’s
familiarity with the governing law; (8) the weight accorded the
plaintiff’s choice of forum; and (9) trial efficiency and the interests of
justice, based on the totality of the circumstances.
Overland, Inc. v. Taylor, 79 F. Supp. 2d 809, 811 (E.D. Mich. 2000) (quoting
Pilates, Inc. v. Pilates Inst., Inc., 891 F. Supp. 175, 182–83 (S.D.N.Y. 1995)).
Evaluating these considerations, the Court concludes that for both the
2

convenience of the parties and witnesses, and in the interests of justice, the present
matter should proceed in the Western District of Michigan. All of the “operative
facts” in this case allegedly happened at the Ionia Maximum Correctional Facility,
which is located in the Western District of Michigan. Moreover, the witnesses and
files necessary to prosecute these claims are located in the Western District of
Michigan and the burden of transporting Preston to this judicial district would be
significant. Therefore, transfer of this action to the Western District is proper.
II. ORDER
Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the Clerk of the Court to transfer this case
to the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 23, 2018

/s/Gershwin A. Drain
GERSHWIN A. DRAIN
United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on
January 23, 2018, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
/s/ Teresa McGovern
Deputy Clerk
3