Bahena v. Ramirez
- Delaney
- 5:22-cv-03039
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Bahena v. Ramirez, Judge Delaney transferred the prisoner’s civil-rights case to the Northern District of California because venue belonged there.
The transfer affects Esmeling Bahena’s civil-rights case against B. Ramirez and the other named defendants by moving it from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California.
What happened
In Bahena v. Ramirez, Esmeling Bahena, a state prisoner without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights lawsuit under a federal law allowing claims against state officials. Bahena also applied to proceed without paying the filing fee, but the court did not decide that application in this order.
The court said the claim arose in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of California. Federal law generally permits a case to be filed where a defendant resides or where a substantial part of the events occurred. Because the claim arose in Monterey County, the case was filed in the wrong federal district.
The court transferred the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Judge Carolyn K. Delaney entered the order on May 23, 2022.
The detailed version
- Bahena v. Ramirez · No. 5:22-cv-03039
- Delaney
- May 23, 2022
Background
Esmeling Bahena, identified in the order as a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Bahena also filed an application to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. The order does not rule on that application.
Venue
Venue means the proper federal district for a case. The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), which provides that a civil action may generally be brought where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the relevant events occurred, or, in certain circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction. The court found that Bahena’s claim arose in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of California. It therefore concluded that the action should have been filed there rather than in the Eastern District of California.
Disposition
The court ordered that the matter be transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The order addressed venue and did not decide the merits of Bahena’s civil-rights claims. Judge Carolyn K. Delaney signed the order.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.