Wiggins v. Vernado et al
Filing
2
ORDER: Plaintiff's action is TRANSFERRED to the Eastern District of North Carolina. The Clerk is instructed to terminate this action. Signed by Chief Judge Martin Reidinger on 1/18/2023. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (maf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 3:23-cv-00010-MR
MECO TARNELL WIGGINS,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
SHAKENA VERNADO, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________ )
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on review of the Plaintiff’s pro se
Complaint.1 [Doc. 1].
I.
BACKGROUND
The pro se Plaintiff, a state prisoner currently incarcerated at the Tabor
Correctional Institution in Tabor City, North Carolina,2 filed this civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He names as Defendants: Shakena
Verano, a Harnett CI captain; FNU Bulhholtz, an NCDPS regional director in
Raleigh;3 FNU Urso, a Tabor CI case manager; and Jamie Bullard, the Tabor
1
The Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, or moved to proceed in forma pauperis.
2
Tabor City is located in Columbus County, which is in the Eastern District of North
Carolina.
3
Raleigh is located in Wake County, which is in the Eastern District of North Carolina.
Case 3:23-cv-00010-MR Document 2 Filed 01/18/23 Page 1 of 3
CI warden. The Plaintiff claims that his First Amendment rights were violated
when he was transferred from Harnett CI4 to Tabor CI, which cannot
accommodate his religious diet. [Doc. 1 at 4-6]. As injury, the Plaintiff claims
that he has developed high blood pressure, swelling in his legs, chest pain,
and “restless nights” due to stress. [Id. at 6]. He seeks damages and
injunctive relief. [Id.].
II.
DISCUSSION
In an action arising under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, venue is established by
28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), which provides that a civil action may be brought in “(1)
a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are
residents of the State in which the district is located; (2) a judicial district in
which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim
occurred … ; or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be
brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any
defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such
action.” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
Therefore, under § 1391, the Plaintiff’s action may be heard in a venue
where all the Defendants reside, or in the venue where the issue
substantially arose, which here is the Eastern District of North Carolina.
4
Harnett CI is located in Harnett County, which is in the Eastern District of North Carolina.
2
Case 3:23-cv-00010-MR Document 2 Filed 01/18/23 Page 2 of 3
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the Court may dismiss this action or, if it is
in the interest of justice, transfer this action to the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of North Carolina. In the interest of justice, the Court
will transfer this action to the Eastern District of North Carolina.
III.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated herein, this action will be transferred to the
Eastern District of North Carolina.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s action is
TRANSFERRED to the Eastern District of North Carolina.
The Clerk is instructed to terminate this action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: January 17, 2023
3
Case 3:23-cv-00010-MR Document 2 Filed 01/18/23 Page 3 of 3
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?