Greenwood v. American Kennel Club

Background

Elaine Greenwood, proceeding without a lawyer, sued the American Kennel Club and individuals associated with it. The opinion says that Greenwood alleged that Steven Daniel Gladstone, a now-deceased associate of the American Kennel Club, sexually assaulted her at an American Kennel Club event and raped her at a New York City hotel in 1995, and sexually assaulted her in Carthage, North Carolina, from 2005 until his death in 2017. She alleged that, beginning February 25, 2015, the American Kennel Club became involved in aiding, abetting, and facilitating Gladstone’s alleged sex crimes and sex-trafficking venture. Her complaint asserted claims under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, a federal statute that provides a private civil claim.

The individual defendants identified in the opinion included Jack Norton and Marcus Bach, described as American Kennel Club employees and North Carolina residents; Karolynne McAteer, described as an American Kennel Club licensed judge and North Carolina resident; Heather McManus, Dennis Sprung, Gina DiNardo, and Michael Liosis, described as New York residents; and David Frei, whose residency was not identified in the complaint. Greenwood did not sue Gladstone or his estate.

Venue and Transfer

The court concluded that venue was not proper in the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) because the defendants did not all reside in New York. Venue also was not proper there under § 1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events supporting Greenwood’s claims against the named defendants occurred in Carthage, North Carolina, in Moore County. The court stated that venue was proper in the Middle District of North Carolina.

The court also determined that transfer was appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which permits transfer for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. It cited the location of the underlying events, expected witnesses and documents in North Carolina, records from an investigation that Greenwood said occurred there, and the fact that Greenwood did not reside in the Southern District of New York. The court therefore directed the Clerk of Court to transfer all claims asserted in the complaint to the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina.

New York Events and Possible Amendment

The court noted that Greenwood’s complaint described a 1995 rape in New York City by Gladstone but did not identify a defendant in this action who Greenwood claimed was liable for that conduct. The court stated that Greenwood could pursue state-law claims concerning that alleged conduct against new defendants in an amended complaint. It explained that New York’s Adult Survivors Act revived certain otherwise time-barred state-law claims filed between November 24, 2022, and November 24, 2023, and that Greenwood filed her complaint on November 22, 2023.

The court further stated that the Adult Survivors Act did not revive Greenwood’s claims under the federal trafficking statute because that statute has its own limitations period. If Greenwood wished to assert New York state-law claims concerning the 1995 events, the court granted her 60 days from the date of the order to file an amended complaint. The court stated that those claims must arise under New York law, be brought against defendants who do not reside in North Carolina and may be liable for the 1995 events, and involve more than $75,000 for diversity jurisdiction to apply.

Other Orders and Disposition

The court directed that no summons issue from the Southern District of New York at that time and that all named defendants be terminated from that action. It directed the Clerk to hold the matter open. If Greenwood did not file an amended complaint, the court stated that it would dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied Greenwood’s ability to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal. The order transferred the claims and addressed venue and amendment; it did not decide the underlying merits of Greenwood’s trafficking or potential state-law claims.