Brown #181534 v. Rivard et al

Filing 4

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Eastern District of Michigan; signed by Magistrate Judge Ray Kent (Magistrate Judge Ray Kent, fhw)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION RONALD KIRK BROWN, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 1:16-cv-504 Honorable Robert Holmes Bell STEVE RIVARD et al., ORDER OF TRANSFER Defendants. ____________________________________/ This is a civil rights action brought by a state prisoner pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff presently is incarcerated at the Earnest C. Brooks Correctional Facility. Plaintiff sues seven prison officials employed at the St. Louis Correctional Facility. In his pro se complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants abused and retaliated against Plaintiff while he was housed at the St. Louis Correctional Facility because Plaintiff had filed a prior civil rights action against employees of the facility. Under the revised venue statute, venue in federal-question cases lies in the district in which any defendant resides or in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). The events giving rise to Plaintiff’s action occurred at the St. Louis, Michigan, which is located in Gratiot County. Gratiot County is within the geographical boundaries of the Eastern District of Michigan. 28 U.S.C. § 102(a). Defendants are public officials serving in Gratiot County, and they “reside” in that county for purposes of venue over a suit challenging official acts. See Butterworth v. Hill, 114 U.S. 128, 132 (1885); O’Neill v. Battisti, 472 F.2d 789, 791 (6th Cir. 1972). In these circumstances, venue is proper only in the Eastern District. Therefore: IT IS ORDERED that this case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). It is noted that this Court has not decided Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, nor has the Court reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A, or under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: May 20, 2016 /s/ Ray Kent RAY KENT United States Magistrate Judge -2-

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?