Scholtes v. Abott et al

Filing 2

OPINION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Western District of Michigan. Signed by District Judge Judith E. Levy. (DPer)

Case 5:21-cv-10260-JEL-CI ECF No. 2, PageID.11 Filed 02/18/21 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
Christopher James Scholtes,
Petitioner,
v.

Case No. 21-cv-10260
Judith E. Levy
United States District Judge

Daniel Abbott, et al.,
Respondents.

Magistrate Judge Curtis Ivy, Jr.

________________________________/
OPINION AND ORDER TRANSFERRING THE PETITION FOR
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS TO THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN
DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN [1]
Christopher James Scholtes (“Petitioner”) is a pretrial detainee
currently confined at the Van Buren County Jail in Paw Paw, Michigan.
Petitioner has filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28
U.S.C. § 2241. (ECF No. 1.) He seeks to be released from pretrial
detention based on the Covid-19 pandemic. Petitioner states that he has
contracted Covid-19 and, based upon his numerous underlying health
conditions, needs to seek medical treatment from specialists unavailable
to him at the jail. The Court concludes that the proper venue for this
petition is in the Western District of Michigan and orders the petition

Case 5:21-cv-10260-JEL-CI ECF No. 2, PageID.12 Filed 02/18/21 Page 2 of 3

transferred to that district.
“Writs of habeas corpus may be granted by . . . the district courts
and any circuit judge within their respective jurisdictions.” 28 U.S.C. §
2241(a). “The federal habeas statute straightforwardly provides that the
proper respondent to a habeas petition is ‘the person who has custody
over [the petitioner].’” Rumsfeld v. Padilla, 542 U.S. 426, 434-35 (2004)
(quoting 28 U.S.C. § 2242). The court in the district where the petition
was filed may, in the exercise of its discretion and in furtherance of
justice, transfer the application to another district for a hearing and
determination. 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) (“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.”).
Petitioner is confined in Van Buren County, Michigan, and
challenges the conditions of his confinement there. Van Buren County is
within the geographical confines of the Western District of Michigan. See
28 U.S.C. § 102(b)(1).
Because of the potential inconvenience and expense of moving
Petitioner between his facility and the Court for any hearings and
2

Case 5:21-cv-10260-JEL-CI ECF No. 2, PageID.13 Filed 02/18/21 Page 3 of 3

because the entirety of his petition relates to acts and witnesses within
the confines of the Western District of Michigan, the interests of justice
are furthered by a transfer of the case to the Western District of
Michigan.
For the reasons set forth, 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: February 18, 2021
Ann Arbor, Michigan

s/Judith E. Levy
JUDITH E. LEVY
United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served
upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court’s
ECF System to their respective email or First Class U.S. mail addresses
disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on February 18, 2021.
s/William Barkholz
WILLIAM BARKHOLZ
Case Manager

3