Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 19, 2022

Lundstrom v. Contra Costa Health Services

Judge
Charles Breyer
Docket
3:22-cv-06227
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Lundstrom v. Contra Costa Health Services, Judge Claire granted transfer to the Northern District of California without deciding the dismissal motion.

Who this affects

Margaret Lundstrom and Contra Costa Health Services; the case was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California.

What happened

Margaret Lundstrom sued Contra Costa Health Services and paid the filing fee. Contra Costa Health Services said the case belonged in the Northern District of California because it is located in Contra Costa County and most events occurred there. Lundstrom did not object to the transfer.

The court applied the federal venue statute and found that the defendant and most relevant events were in Contra Costa County. It concluded that transferring the case served the interests of justice and reflected the parties’ agreement.

In Lundstrom v. Contra Costa Health Services, Magistrate Judge Allison Claire granted the defendant’s motion to change venue and transferred the case to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California for all further proceedings. The order did not rule on the defendant’s separate motion to dismiss.

The detailed version

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

Case
Lundstrom v. Contra Costa Health Services · No. 3:22-cv-06227
Judge
Charles Breyer
Date
Oct. 19, 2022

Background

Margaret Lundstrom, representing herself, filed this action and paid the filing fee on August 8, 2022. Contra Costa Health Services filed a motion to dismiss and a motion to change venue. The defendant argued that the case should be transferred to the Northern District of California because the defendant is located in Contra Costa County and most of the events involved in the action occurred there. Lundstrom stated that she did not object to the transfer.

Venue analysis

The court cited 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), the federal statute identifying districts where a civil action may be brought. It found that the defendant was in Contra Costa County and that most of the events took place there. The court also cited 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), which permits a federal court to transfer a case filed in the wrong district when doing so serves the interests of justice. The court concluded that transfer was appropriate both in the interests of justice and because the parties agreed to it.

Ruling

Magistrate Judge Allison Claire granted the defendant’s motion to change venue, identified as ECF No. 6, and transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California for all further proceedings. The order does not state that the court ruled on the defendant’s separate motion to dismiss.

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.