Davis v. U.S. Bank, N.A. et al
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER transferring case to the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 8/16/2012) (cea)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
BRENDA P. DAVIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
U.S. BANK, N.A. and
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 3:12-CV-2756-L
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Plaintiff’s Complaint, filed August 13, 2012. After reviewing Plaintiff’s
Complaint, the court determines sua sponte that this case should be and is hereby transferred to the
Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas.
Plaintiff Brenda P. Davis (“Plaintiff”) maintains a residence at 220 Elk Run Drive, Fort
Worth, Texas, 76140. Plaintiff lists her county of residence as Tarrant County. Plaintiff also lists
the county of the first listed defendant as Tarrant County. The property at issue in this action is
located at 220 Elk Run Drive, Fort Worth, Texas, 76140. Fort Worth is located in Tarrant County,
Texas. Tarrant County is located in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas. See
28 U.S.C. § 124(a)(2).
The court sua sponte considers whether this action should be transferred to the Fort Worth
Division of the Northern District of Texas pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). See Jarvis Christian
College v. Exxon Corp., 845 F.2d 523, 528 (5th Cir. 1988) (holding that district court may sua sponte
transfer action pursuant to 28 USC § 1404(a)). Because the property, Plaintiff, and at least one
defendant are all located in Tarrant County, the more likely convenient venue is in the Fort Worth
Memorandum Opinion and Order - Page 1
Division of the Northern District of Texas. Plaintiff states that the “commission of the offense”
occurred on November 24, 2003, in Burleson, Texas. Burleson, Texas, is a city in Johnson and
Tarrant counties. Johnson County is located in the Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas,
and Tarrant County is located in the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas. See 28
U.S.C. § 124(a). Without more information, the court cannot determine the exact county of the
events giving rise to this action; however, the court can think of no way in which the parties and
witnesses will be more convenienced by trying this action in the Dallas Division of the Northern
District of Texas.
Moreover, the court has considered each of the eight factors set forth in In re Volkswagen
AG, 371 F.3d 201, 203 (5th Cir. 2004). The majority of these factors is neutral and does not weigh
in favor of or against a transfer to the Fort Worth Division;* however, the first and sixth factors
clearly favor a transfer to the Fort Worth Division. Accordingly, the court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1404(a), “[f]or the convenience of the parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice,” hereby
transfers this action to the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas. The clerk of the
court shall effect the transfer in accordance with the usual procedure.
It is so ordered this 16th day of August, 2012.
_________________________________
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge
*
These factors include: the relative ease of access to sources of proof; the availability of compulsory process
to secure the attendance of witnesses; the cost of attendance for willing witnesses; all other practical problems that make
trial of a case easy, expeditious and inexpensive; the administrative difficulties flowing from court congestion; the local
interest in having localized interests decided at home; the familiarity of the forum with the law that will govern the case;
and the avoidance of unnecessary problems of conflict of laws of the application of foreign law. In re Volkswagen, 371
F.3d at 203.
Memorandum Opinion and Order - Page 2
Memorandum Opinion and Order - Page 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?