Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 12, 2025

Deng v. NYPD 109TH DET. SQUAD IN FLUSHING QUEENS

Full caption

Hai Yan Deng v. NYPD 109TH DET. SQUAD IN FLUSHING QUEENS; NYPD PROPERTY CLERK OFFICE; JONATHAN SELKOW (ADA)

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:25-cv-06510
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Deng v. NYPD 109TH DET. SQUAD, Chief Judge Swain transferred the case to the Eastern District of New York for convenience.

Who this affects

Hai Yan Deng’s lawsuit was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. The named defendants were the NYPD 109TH DET. SQUAD IN FLUSHING QUEENS, the NYPD PROPERTY CLERK OFFICE, and JONATHAN SELKOW (ADA); the opinion also refers to the remaining defendant as Queens County Assistant District Attorney Jonathan Selkowe.

What happened

In Hai Yan Deng v. NYPD 109TH DET. SQUAD IN FLUSHING QUEENS, NYPD PROPERTY CLERK OFFICE, and Jonathan Selkow, Hai Yan Deng alleged that her valuable property had been transferred to a deceased person. She sought damages and an order requiring the defendants to act.

The Southern District of New York found that Queens County was in the Eastern District of New York and that a substantial part of the events occurred there. It transferred the action to that court because the documents and witnesses were likely to be there. The court did not decide whether Deng’s claims were legally valid.

Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk to transfer the action, closed the case in the Southern District, and stated that summonses would not issue there. The Eastern District will decide whether Deng may proceed without paying filing fees; the court also denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Deng v. NYPD 109TH DET. SQUAD IN FLUSHING QUEENS · No. 1:25-cv-06510
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Sept. 12, 2025

Background

Hai Yan Deng, who the opinion says is incarcerated at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility, filed this lawsuit without a lawyer. She alleged that “they transferred all of my valuable property to the decease[d] [sic].” She named the NYPD 109th Detective Squad in Flushing, Queens; the NYPD Property Clerk Office; and Queens County Assistant District Attorney Jonathan Selkowe. She requested damages and an order requiring action from the defendants.

Venue analysis

The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391, the federal venue statute. It said it was unclear whether the NYPD detective squad and Property Clerk Office could be sued as separate entities. The court also noted that, if Deng intended to sue the City of New York, the City resides in both the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. Deng did not allege where Jonathan Selkowe resides, so the court could not determine whether the Southern District was a proper venue based on the defendants’ residences.

The court found, however, that a substantial part of the events occurred in Queens County, which is in the Eastern District of New York. That made the Eastern District a proper venue under § 1391(b)(2).

Transfer and disposition

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a federal court may transfer a case to another proper federal district for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. The court concluded that transfer was appropriate because the alleged events occurred in the Eastern District and relevant documents and witnesses would likely be located there.

The court directed the Clerk to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. It stated that whether Deng may proceed without prepaying fees would be decided by the transferee court, that summonses would not issue from the Southern District, and that the order closed the action in that court. 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 did not decide the merits of Deng’s property-related claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.