Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 17, 2025

Spencer v. Spencer

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-05800
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Spencer v. Spencer, Chief Judge Swain transferred the case to Vermont because venue was improper in the Southern District of New York.

Who this affects

Kevin Spencer, Sarah Spencer, and Alex Spencer; the case was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the District of Vermont.

What happened

In Spencer v. Spencer, Kevin Spencer brought a self-represented case against Sarah Spencer and Alex Spencer, alleging that his rights were violated in Vermont and New Jersey. He invoked the court’s diversity jurisdiction.

The court found that none of the defendants lived in the Southern District of New York and that the alleged events did not occur there. It concluded that a substantial part of the events occurred in Vermont, making the District of Vermont a proper venue.

The court transferred the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont under the federal venue statute. Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain also stated that the Vermont court would decide whether Spencer could proceed without paying fees; no summons would issue from the New York court, and the case was closed there.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Spencer v. Spencer · No. 1:25-cv-05800
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 17, 2025

Background

Kevin Spencer filed this self-represented action against Sarah Spencer and Alex Spencer. He invoked federal diversity-of-citizenship jurisdiction and alleged that the defendants violated his rights in Vermont and New Jersey. The opinion states that Spencer resided in Jericho, Vermont; Alex Spencer resided in South Burlington, Vermont; and Sarah Spencer resided in South Orange, New Jersey.

Venue analysis

Federal law permits a civil case to be filed in certain districts, including a district where a defendant resides or where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred. The court determined that venue was not proper in the Southern District of New York because neither defendant resided there and the alleged events did not occur there.

The court understood the complaint to allege that a substantial part of the events occurred at Spencer’s residence in Vermont. Because Vermont is one federal judicial district, the court concluded that the case could have been brought in the District of Vermont.

Ruling

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406, a court may transfer a case filed in the wrong venue when transfer serves the interests of justice. The court transferred this action to the United States District Court for the District of Vermont. The Clerk was directed to make the transfer. The court did not decide the underlying allegations or whether Spencer should prevail.

The court stated that the transferee court would decide whether Spencer could proceed without prepaying filing fees. A summons would not issue from the Southern District of New York, and the order closed the case in that court. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.