United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division
LaBRYSON D. SNIDER, SR., Plaintiff,
TOM BOATWRIGHT, et al., Defendants.
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CHARLES S. COODY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
U.S.C. § 1983 action is pending before the court on a
complaint filed by LaBryson D. Snider, Sr., an inmate
currently incarcerated at the Monroe County Detention
Facility, in which he challenges his confinement in a pod of
such facility with his victim's cousin. Doc. 1 at 3-4
Snider names Tom Boatwright, the Sheriff of Monroe County,
Alabama, and Fred Conner, an officer at the Monroe County
Detention Facility, as defendants. Snider seeks monetary
damages for the alleged violation of his constitutional
rights. Doc. 1 at 5.
review of the complaint, the court finds that this case
should be transferred to the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Alabama pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
U.S.C. § 1983 “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). The law further
provides that when a case is filed “laying venue in the
wrong division or district” the court may, “if it
be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any
district . . . where it could have been brought.” 28
U.S.C. § 1406(a); see also 28 U.S.C. §
1404(a) (“For the convenience of parties and witnesses,
in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any
civil action to any other district . . . where it might have
Monroe County Detention Facility is located within the
jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Alabama. Thus, the actions about which
Snider complains occurred in the Southern District of
Alabama. Moreover, it is clear from the complaint that the
individuals responsible for such actions reside in the
Southern District of Alabama. Under these circumstances, the
claims asserted by Snider are beyond the venue of this court.
However, it is clear from the face of the complaint that the
proper venue for this cause of action is the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.
light of the foregoing, the court finds that in the interest
of justice and for the convenience of the parties, this case
should be transferred to the United States District for the
Southern District of Alabama for review and disposition.
it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this
case be transferred to the United States District Court for
the Southern District of Alabama pursuant to the provisions
of 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
before May 28, 2019, the plaintiff may file
objections to the Recommendation. Any objection must
specifically identify the findings in the Recommendation
objected to. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will
not be considered by the District Court. The plaintiff is
advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the
court and, therefore, it is not appealable.
to file written objections to the proposed findings and
recommendations in the Magistrate Judge's report shall
bar the plaintiff from a de novo determination by
the District Court of factual findings and legal issues
covered in the report and shall “waive the right to
challenge on appeal the district court's order based on
unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions” except
upon grounds of plain error if necessary in the interests of
justice. 11TH Cir. R. 3-1; see Resolution Trust Co. v.
Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir.
1993); Henley v. Johnson, 885 F.2d 790, 794 (11th