Grant v. 115th Precinct
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-02058
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Grant v. 115th Precinct, Judge Swain transferred Grant’s constitutional-rights case to the Eastern District of New York because Queens was the relevant forum.
Elizabeth Grant’s case was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York; the receiving court will decide whether she may proceed without prepaying fees.
What happened
In Grant v. 115th Precinct, Elizabeth Grant, representing herself, sued the 115th Precinct, several officers, and the Association for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals under a federal civil-rights law. She alleged that her constitutional rights were violated in Queens County, including during her arrest and criminal proceedings.
The court said venue could be proper in the Southern District of New York, but the events, witnesses, documents, and criminal proceedings were connected to Queens County, which is in the Eastern District of New York. It therefore transferred the case to that district for convenience and fairness.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the transfer and closed the case in the Southern District of New York. She also directed that no summons issue there, left the fee question to the receiving court, and denied fee-free status for any appeal from the transfer order.
The detailed version
- Grant v. 115th Precinct · No. 1:25-cv-02058
- Laura Swain
- Mar. 14, 2025
Background
Elizabeth Grant, who was detained at the Rose M. Singer Center on Rikers Island, filed this case without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional rights by state actors. She named the 115th Precinct of the New York City Police Department, several officers working at that precinct, and the Association for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals as defendants. Grant alleged that the defendants violated her federal constitutional rights in East Elmhurst, Queens County, including during her arrest at her residence and in the course of her criminal proceedings in Queens County Criminal Court.
Venue and Transfer
The court explained that federal law permits a civil case to proceed in districts connected to the defendants or to a substantial part of the events underlying the claims. Queens County is in the Eastern District of New York. Although the court recognized that venue might also be proper in the Southern District of New York, it found that the underlying events occurred in Queens County, where the individual defendants work and where Grant’s criminal proceedings were occurring. The court also considered it reasonable to expect that relevant witnesses and documents would be located there.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer a case—even when venue is proper—to another district for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. The court determined that the Eastern District of New York appeared to be the more convenient forum.
Disposition
The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Clerk was directed to carry out the transfer, and the case was closed in the Southern District of New York. The court stated that the receiving court would decide whether Grant could proceed without paying filing fees. No summons was to issue from the Southern District of New York. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
The order addressed venue and transfer only; it did not decide whether Grant’s constitutional-rights allegations were valid.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.