Stansberry v. Auburn Correctional Facility
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-05646
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Stansberry v. Auburn Correctional Facility, Judge Swain transferred the constitutional-claims case to Northern District of New York without deciding its merits.
Damante Troy Stansberry’s case was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of New York. The receiving court will decide whether he may proceed without prepaying fees.
What happened
In Stansberry v. Auburn Correctional Facility, Damante Troy Stansberry, representing himself, sued Auburn Correctional Facility over alleged federal constitutional violations and sought unspecified relief. He appeared to base his claims on events at the facility.
The court concluded that the Northern District of New York was a more appropriate location because Auburn is in Cayuga County and the events, witnesses, and documents appeared likely to be there. The court transferred the case under the federal law allowing transfer for convenience and fairness.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the clerk to transfer the case to the Northern District of New York. The Southern District court closed the action there, did not issue a summons, left the decision about proceeding without prepaying fees to the receiving court, and denied fee-free status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Stansberry v. Auburn Correctional Facility · No. 1:25-cv-05646
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 10, 2025
Background
Damante Troy Stansberry, who was incarcerated at Auburn Correctional Facility and was representing himself, filed an action in the Southern District of New York alleging federal constitutional violations. The opinion does not identify the specific constitutional claims. Stansberry sought unspecified relief. The court stated that the claims appeared to arise from events at Auburn, in Cayuga County, New York.
Venue analysis
The court discussed 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), the general federal venue statute. It stated that venue may be proper where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in limited circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s authority.
The court said it did not appear that Auburn, described as a New York State prison, had the capacity to be sued. It did not decide that issue. The court explained that, even if Auburn could be sued, it appeared to be located in Cayuga County, within the Northern District of New York. The court also found that a substantial part, if not all, of the events underlying Stansberry’s claims appeared to have occurred there.
Transfer ruling
The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which permits transfer to another federal district for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. It reasoned that relevant documents and witnesses would likely be located in the Northern District of New York and that the Northern District was a proper and more convenient venue.
The court directed the clerk to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. It stated that the receiving court would decide whether Stansberry could proceed without prepaying fees. The Southern District court did not issue a summons and closed the action in that court. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
The opinion transferred the case based on venue and convenience; it did not decide the merits of Stansberry’s constitutional claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.