Opinion

Jefferson v. Brown

Court
District Court, E.D. New York
Filed
Oct 15, 2024
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 33.4%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

TYRONE JEFFERSON,

Plaintiff,

1:24-CV-7645 (LTS)

-against-

TRANSFER ORDER

YOUNG BROWN,

Defendant.

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, Chief United States District Judge:

Plaintiff Tyrone Jefferson, of Hollis, Queens County, New York, who appears pro se, filed

this action invoking the court’s federal question jurisdiction, and he seeks the following relief: “I

want my identity back[,] money[,] TV, [binoculars,] drone[,] mail[,] checks[,] medication. [sic]”

(ECF 1, at 6.) He sues another individual, Young Brown, who appears to also reside in Hollis,

Queens, New York. For the following reasons, the Court transfers this action, under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1406(a), to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

DISCUSSION

The applicable venue provision for Plaintiff’s claims is found at 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b),

which provides that, unless otherwise provided by law, a federal civil action must 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 a

substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated; 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). For venue purposes, a “natural person” resides in the judicial district where

the person is domiciled, and any other “entity with the capacity to sue and be sued,” if a

defendant, resides in any judicial district where it is subject to personal jurisdiction with respect

to the civil action in question. § 1391(c)(1), (2).

Plaintiff seems to allege that Defendant Young Brown resides, like him, in Hollis, Queens

County, New York. (ECF 1, at 3.) Queens County lies within the Eastern District of New York,

see 28 U.S.C. § 112(c), not within this judicial district.1 Thus, under Section 1391(b)(1), the

United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York is the only proper venue for this

action.

In addition, because Plaintiff alleges that the events that are the bases for his claims also

occurred in Hollis, Queens County, New York (ECF 1, at 5), in the Eastern District of New York,

see § 112(c), and not in this judicial district, the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of New York, and not this court, is also the only proper venue for this action under

Section 1391(b)(2).

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), if a plaintiff files a case in the wrong venue, the court “shall

dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which

it could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). For the reasons discussed above, the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and not this court, is the only proper

venue for this action. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, this Court transfers this action to the

United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. See id.

1 The judicial district for this court, the Southern District of New York, is comprised of

the following New York State counties: (1) New York (New York City Borough of Manhattan);

(2) Bronx (New York City Borough of the Bronx); (3) Westchester; (4) Dutchess; (5) Rockland;

(6) Orange; (7) Putnam; and (8) Sullivan. See 28 U.S.C. § 112(b).

CONCLUSION

The Court directs the Clerk of Court to transfer this action to the United States District

Court for the Eastern District of New York. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Whether a court should

permit Plaintiff to proceed further without prepayment of fees (ECF 2), and whether a court

should request pro bono counsel to represent Plaintiff (ECF 3),2 are determinations to be made

by the transferee court. A summons shall not issue from this court. This order closes this action

in this court. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to terminate all matters pending on this court’s

docket of this action.

The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order

would not be taken in good faith and, therefore, in forma pauperis status is denied for the

purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).

SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 15, 2024

New York, New York

/s/ Laura Taylor Swain

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN

Chief United States District Judge

2 Plaintiff’s application for the court to request pro bono counsel is not signed. (ECF 3.)

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.