Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 26, 2019

Avent v. Platinum Plus Auto Protection

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:19-cv-09773
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Avent v. Platinum Plus Auto Protection, Judge McMahon transferred the case to the Northern District of New York because venue was improper.

Who this affects

Reuben Avent and the defendants are affected by the transfer of the action from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of New York; the Southern District case was closed, and no summons was to issue from that court.

What happened

Reuben Avent, representing himself, sued Platinum Plus Auto Protection and other defendants over a warranty protection insurance policy for his car. He asserted racial discrimination and other claims under federal laws.

Judge McMahon concluded that the Southern District of New York was not the proper venue because Avent did not allege that any defendant lived there or that the relevant events occurred there. The claims arose in Duanesburg, New York, which is in the Northern District.

Judge Colleen McMahon transferred the action to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. The order closed the case in the Southern District, directed that no summons issue there, and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Avent v. Platinum Plus Auto Protection · No. 1:19-cv-09773
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Nov. 26, 2019

Background

Reuben Avent, appearing without a lawyer, sued Platinum Plus Auto Protection and other defendants. He invoked 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and diversity jurisdiction. His claims concerned racial discrimination and other alleged wrongdoing arising from a warranty protection insurance policy he purchased for his car on March 20, 2019, when he was a resident of Duanesburg, New York.

Venue analysis

The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391, the federal venue statute. The court stated that Avent did not allege that any defendant resided in the Southern District of New York or that any event or omission giving rise to his claims occurred there. Because the claims arose in Duanesburg, in Schenectady County, the court determined that venue lay in the Northern District of New York.

Ruling

The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), which permits transfer when venue is improper. The Clerk was directed to transfer the action, mail the order to Avent, and note service on the docket. The court directed that no summons issue from the Southern District and stated that the order closed the case there. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. Judge Colleen McMahon did not decide the merits of Avent’s 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.