Duckett v. Garcia
- Beth Freeman
- 5:24-cv-01999
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Duckett v. Garcia, Judge Claire transferred the prisoner’s civil-rights case to the Northern District of California because venue was improper.
James Duckett, also identified as Jamesha Duckett, and P. Garcia; the case was transferred from the Eastern District of California to the Northern District of California.
What happened
In Duckett v. Garcia, James Duckett, also identified as Jamesha Duckett, filed a civil-rights case against P. Garcia under a federal civil-rights law. Duckett was representing himself and asked to proceed without paying the filing fee.
The court said the defendant was located and the events underlying the claim occurred in Monterey County, which is in the Northern District of California. The court therefore concluded that the case should have been filed there.
The court transferred the matter to the Northern District of California in the interest of justice. The order was signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire.
The detailed version
- Duckett v. Garcia · No. 5:24-cv-01999
- Beth Freeman
- Apr. 1, 2024
Background
James Duckett, also identified in the caption as Jamesha Duckett, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against P. Garcia. The opinion states that Duckett is a state prisoner proceeding without a lawyer. Duckett 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). It stated that the defendant or defendants were located in Monterey County and that the claim arose there. Monterey County is in the Northern District of California. The court therefore concluded that the case should have been filed in that district rather than the district where the action was filed.
Ruling
The court ordered that the matter be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The order addressed venue and did not decide the underlying civil-rights claim.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.