Mayron v. Silverman

Background

Charles Mayron, proceeding without a lawyer, sued Ian Silverman in his official capacity as a representative of the New York State Department of Health Office of Professional Medical Conduct (OPMC). Mayron alleged various violations of his constitutional rights and sought injunctive relief, meaning a court order requiring a party to take or stop taking specified actions.

Venue Analysis

Venue is the federal district where a case may properly be litigated. The court explained that venue may be proper where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. It also explained that a court may transfer a civil action, for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice, to another district where the action could have been brought.

The court found that the complaint contained no nonconclusory factual allegation showing that venue was proper in the Southern District of New York. The complaint did not indicate that Mayron resided or practiced medicine there. Although the complaint alleged that Silverman acted in his official capacity from within the Southern District, documents attached to the complaint indicated that Silverman and the OPMC were located in Albany, New York. When documents attached to a complaint contradict its allegations, the documents control for this purpose.

Based on those attached documents, the court concluded that a substantial part of the events or omissions underlying Mayron’s claim, and the conduct he sought to have stopped or required, occurred or would occur in the Northern District of New York, which includes Albany.

Disposition

Judge Ronnie Abrams directed the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York and to inform that court that Mayron had paid the filing fee. The order did not decide the merits of Mayron’s constitutional claims.