Gordon v. Gobes
- Cathy Seibel
- 7:25-cv-08911
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 6
In John Gordon v. Frank Gobes, Esquire, Judge Latella granted Gordon’s motion to transfer the case because venue was improper in Pennsylvania.
The case brought by John Gordon against Frank Gobes, Esquire, was transferred from the Middle District of Pennsylvania to the Southern District of New York; the opinion did not decide the underlying claims.
What happened
John Gordon sued Frank Gobes, Esquire, over claims connected to the litigation of Gordon’s mother’s estate. Gordon represented himself, and the case was filed in the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Gordon asked the court to transfer the case under federal venue laws. The court found that venue was improper in the Middle District of Pennsylvania because Gobes did not reside there and the events underlying the claims did not occur there. Gobes did not oppose the transfer motion.
Judge Latella granted Gordon’s motion and transferred the case to the Southern District of New York. The court found that the case could have been filed there because the events occurred in Westchester County, New York, where Gobes’s listed address was also located, and that transfer was preferable to dismissal because it protected Gordon’s rights as a self-represented party.
The detailed version
- Gordon v. Gobes · No. 7:25-cv-08911
- Cathy Seibel
- Oct. 23, 2025
Background
John Gordon brought this self-represented civil action against Frank Gobes, Esquire, based on events connected to the litigation of Gordon’s mother’s estate. Gordon filed the case in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The docket history described in the opinion included Gordon’s motions for default judgment and entry of default, Gobes’s motion to dismiss, Gordon’s motion to amend the complaint, and Gordon’s later motion to transfer venue.
Transfer Motion
Gordon sought transfer under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1406 and 1404(a). Gobes did not file an opposition by the deadline. The court nevertheless considered the substance of Gordon’s motion rather than granting it solely because it was unopposed.
The court held that venue was not proper in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), venue may generally be proper where a defendant resides or where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims occurred. The court found that Gobes did not reside in the Middle District of Pennsylvania and that none of the relevant events occurred there.
Section 1406(a) allows a court to dismiss a case filed in the wrong district or, when it serves the interests of justice, transfer the case to a district where it could have been brought. The court found that this case could have been brought in the Southern District of New York because the relevant events occurred in Westchester County, New York, and Gobes’s listed address was in White Plains, New York, also in Westchester County. The court further found that transfer served the interests of justice, including by avoiding possible prejudice to Gordon as a self-represented litigant. The opinion also noted that a court may transfer a case from an improper venue even if it lacks personal jurisdiction over the defendant.
Ruling
Judge Latella granted Gordon’s Motion to Transfer to the Southern District of New York. The opinion did not decide the underlying claims or resolve Gobes’s motion to dismiss.
Read the full 6-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.