Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 24, 2023

Bolin v. Northern District Court

Judge
Charles Breyer
Docket
3:23-cv-02022
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Bolin v. Northern District Court, Judge Newman transferred Bolin’s civil-rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to Northern California because the claim arose in San Francisco County.

Who this affects

Paul C. Bolin’s case was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; the order did not resolve his underlying claims.

What happened

Paul C. Bolin, a state prisoner representing himself, filed a civil-rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee. The case was filed in the Eastern District of California, but the opinion says the claim arose in San Francisco County.

The court explained that federal law generally permits a case to be filed where a defendant resides or where the events involved occurred. Because the claim arose in San Francisco County, the court concluded that the Northern District of California was the proper district.

Judge Newman ordered the case transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The order did not decide the underlying civil-rights claims or rule on the fee application.

The detailed version

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

Case
Bolin v. Northern District Court · No. 3:23-cv-02022
Judge
Charles Breyer
Date
Apr. 24, 2023

Background

Paul C. Bolin, identified as a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also filed an application to proceed without paying the filing fee under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.

Venue

The court applied the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). That statute identifies districts where a civil action may be filed, including a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions underlying the claim occurred. The opinion states that Bolin’s claim arose in San Francisco County, which is in the Northern District of California.

Disposition

The court concluded that the action should have been filed in the Northern District of California. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), a federal court may transfer a case filed in the wrong district when doing so serves the interests of justice. Judge Kendall J. Newman ordered that the matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The order did not decide the merits of Bolin’s civil-rights claim or state that it ruled on his application to proceed without paying the filing fee.

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.