JACOBS v. ESTEFAN et al
Filing
2
OPINION. Signed by Judge Mary L. Cooper on 11/16/2011. (gxh)
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
:
JOHN J. JACOBS, JR.,
:
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-4662 (MLC)
:
Plaintiff,
:
O P I N I O N
:
v.
:
:
EMILIO ESTEFAN, et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
:
THE PLAINTIFF PRO SE applies for in-forma-pauperis relief
under 28 U.S.C. § (“Section”) 1915 (“Application”) in this action
to recover damages for the alleged breach of an implied contract.
(Dkt. entry no. 1, Application.) This Court will (1) grant the
Application, and (2) deem the Complaint to be filed.
THIS ACTION would have been more appropriately brought in
Miami, Florida, which is served by the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Florida, where according to
the plaintiff himself:
(1) the defendants reside, work, or can
be found; (2) the plaintiff allegedly traveled in order to meet
with the defendants to discuss and negotiate the implied contract
at issue; (3) the alleged breach occurred; (4) any witnesses and
evidence connected to the alleged meetings and subsequent breach
will be found; and (5) personal jurisdiction over the defendants
will be more certain.
(See dkt. entry no. 1, Compl.)
See Jumara
v. State Farm Ins. Co., 55 F.3d 873, 875, 877 n.3, 883 (3d Cir.
1995); see also 28 U.S.C. § 1404.
IT MAY BE IMPROPER to dismiss a complaint on the basis of
improper venue following an initial screening under Section
1915(e)(2)(B).
1976).
See Sinwell v. Shapp, 536 F.2d 15, 19 (3d Cir.
But this Court is neither screening the Complaint nor
dismissing the Complaint.
Rather, this Court is granting the
Application and transferring the action to a more-appropriate
federal district court, which will in turn screen the Complaint
under Section 1915(e)(2)(B) and determine whether the Complaint
should be dismissed.
See Kapordelis v. Danzig, 387 Fed.Appx.
905, 905-07 (11th Cir. 2010) (affirming order that sua sponte
transferred an action brought under Section 1915 to another
district court), cert. denied, 131 S.Ct. 1481 (2011); Caldwell v.
Freeman, No. 06-943, 2007 WL 114811, at *1-2 (M.D. Tenn. Jan. 10,
2007) (granting in-forma-pauperis application and transferring
action to another district court); Walker v. M. Davis & Sons, No.
98-1910, 1998 WL 199646, at *1 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 27, 1998) (same).
This Court will issue an appropriate order.
s/ Mary L. Cooper
MARY L. COOPER
United States District Judge
Dated:
November 16, 2011
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?