Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 21, 2020

Hill v. Black

Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Docket
4:20-cv-05900
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureSection 1983
In one sentence

In Hill v. Black, Judge Newman transferred the prisoner’s civil-rights case to the Northern District of California because the claim arose there.

Who this affects

Cymeyon Hill and the defendants, because the case was moved from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California.

What happened

In Hill v. Black, Cymeyon Hill, a state prisoner representing himself, filed a civil-rights lawsuit against E. Black and other defendants under a federal civil-rights law. He also asked to proceed without paying the filing fee.

The court explained that federal law generally permits a case to be filed where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in some circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s authority. The court found that Hill’s claim arose in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of California.

Judge Kendall J. Newman transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California because it had been filed in the wrong federal district. The order did not decide the underlying civil-rights claims.

The detailed version

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

Case
Hill v. Black · No. 4:20-cv-05900
Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Date
Aug. 21, 2020

Background

Cymeyon Hill, identified as a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against E. Black and other defendants. Hill also filed an application to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Venue analysis

The court applied the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). That statute allows a civil case to be filed in a district where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or, if no other district qualifies, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction for the action.

The court stated that Hill’s claim arose in Monterey County. Because Monterey County is in the Northern District of California, the court concluded that the case should have been filed there.

Disposition

The court stated that, in the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Judge Kendall J. Newman ordered that the matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The order addressed venue and did not decide the merits of Hill’s civil-rights claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.