United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CHARLES S. COODY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I.
INTRODUCTION
This 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action is pending before the court on a
complaint filed by James Allen Christian, a state inmate
incarcerated at the Donaldson Correctional Facility. In this
complaint, Christian challenges the constitutionality of
conditions at this facility including deficiencies in
staffing and security, overcrowding, deplorable living
conditions, and high levels of violence.
Upon
review of the complaint, the court finds that this case
should be transferred to the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Alabama pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1404(a).[1]
II.
DISCUSSION
A 42
U.S.C. § 1983 “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). The law
further provides that “[f]or 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[.]” 28 U.S.C. §
1404(a).
The
Donaldson Correctional Facility is located within the
jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Alabama. Thus, the conditions about
which Christian complains have occurred at a prison located
in the Northern District of Alabama. Moreover, it is clear
from the complaint that the majority of material witnesses
reside in the Northern District of Alabama and also that the
evidence associated with the pending claims is located in the
jurisdiction of that court. Although by virtue of their
positions as Governor of the State of Alabama and
Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections
defendants Kay Ivey and Jefferson Dunn reside in the Middle
District of Alabama, they are nonetheless subject to service
of process throughout the State and commonly defend suits in
all federal courts of this state.
In
light of the foregoing and in accordance with applicable
federal law, the court concludes that in the interest of
justice, 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 that this
case be transferred to the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Alabama pursuant to the provisions
of 28 U.S.C. § 1404.
The
plaintiff may file objections to the Recommendation on or
before July 16, 2019. Any objection by the
plaintiff must specifically identify the findings in the
Recommendation to which he objects. 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.
The
plaintiff is advised that failure to file written objections
to the proposed findings and recommendations set forth in
this document will bar a de novo determination by
the District Court of factual findings and legal issues
covered in the Recommendation 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).
DONE.
---------