Hart #826834 v. Brewer et al

Filing 5

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE to the Eastern District of Michigan; signed by Chief Judge Hala Y. Jarbou (eod)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
______
RONALD HART,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 1:24-cv-1186
v.
Hon. Hala Y. Jarbou
SHAWN BREWER et al.,
Defendants.

____________________________/
ORDER OF TRANSFER
This is a civil rights action brought by a state prisoner under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff
presently is incarcerated at the Central Michigan Correctional Facility (STF) in St. Louis, Gratiot
County, Michigan. However, this lawsuit concerns events which occurred at the Women’s Huron
Valley Correctional Facility (WHV) in Ypsilanti, Washtenaw County, Michigan. Plaintiff is suing
Defendants Warden Shawn Brewer, Unknown Corrections Officers (Unknown Parties #1 and #2),
an Unknown Psychologist (Unknown Party #3), and an Unknown Supervisor (Unknown Party #4),
because he believes them to be responsible for the death of his daughter, who was confined at
WHV.
In his pro se complaint, Plaintiff alleges that his daughter was assaulted and became
extremely stressed. While confined in segregation, Defendants failed to properly monitor his
daughter, and she was found hanging in her cell.
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 underlying the complaint occurred in Washtenaw

County. Defendants are public officials serving in Washtenaw 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). Washtenaw County is
within the geographical boundaries of the Eastern District of Michigan. 28 U.S.C. § 102(a). 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).

Dated: November 22, 2024

/s/ Hala Y. Jarbou
HALA Y. JARBOU
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2