United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Susan
Russ Walker United States Magistrate Judge.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff,
Brock Gooch, a state inmate, initiated this 42 U.S.C. §
1983 action on May 8, 2019. Plaintiff challenges an alleged
denial of medical care and the conditions of confinement to
which he was subjected during his incarceration at the
Colbert County Jail. The Colbert County Jail is in Tuscumbia,
Alabama, which is within the jurisdiction of the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
Upon review, the court finds this case should be transferred
to the United States District Court for the Northern District
of Alabama under 28 U.S.C. § 1406.[1]
II.
DISCUSSION
A 42
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
been brought[.]”)
The
Colbert County Jail is within the jurisdiction of the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
The actions about which Plaintiff complains occurred in the
Northern District of Alabama, and a majority of material
witnesses and evidence associated with those claims relevant
to Plaintiff's allegations are in the Northern District
of Alabama. Under these circumstances, the claims asserted by
Plaintiff are beyond the venue of this court. 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
Northern District of Alabama.
In
light of the foregoing, the court concludes that in the
interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties,
this case should be transferred to the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Alabama for review and
disposition.[2]
III.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly,
it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge this case be
TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Alabama under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
It is
further
ORDERED
that on or before May 29, 2019, Plaintiff
may file an objection to the Recommendation. Any objection
must specifically identify the findings in the Recommendation
to which Plaintiff objects. Frivolous, conclusive or general
objections will not be considered by the District Court.
Plaintiff is advised this Recommendation is not a final order
and, therefore, it is not appealable.
Failure
to file a written objection to the proposed findings and
recommendations in the Magistrate Judge's report shall
bar a party 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 Cir. 1989).
---------