Johnson v. New York State Department of Transportation
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-11127
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 5
In Johnson v. New York State Department of Transportation, Judge McMahon dismissed the improperly venued case without prejudice and denied fee-free appeal status.
Robert W. Johnson’s case was dismissed without prejudice because it was filed in the wrong federal district, and he was denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The New York State Department of Transportation, New York State, and Adesa Corporation were defendants in the dismissed case.
What happened
Johnson v. New York State Department of Transportation concerns Robert W. Johnson’s lawsuit about injuries and vehicle damage from a February 1, 2017 motor vehicle accident in Buffalo, New York. Johnson represented himself and had permission to file without paying the filing fee upfront.
The court concluded that the case belonged in a different federal district because the alleged events occurred in Buffalo, not in the Southern District of New York. The court also decided that transferring the case was not in the interest of justice because of Johnson’s history of filing numerous related lawsuits.
Judge Colleen McMahon dismissed the complaint without prejudice for improper venue and did not allow Johnson to amend it. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. New York State Department of Transportation · No. 1:19-cv-11127
- Colleen McMahon
- Jan. 24, 2020
Background
Robert W. Johnson, representing himself, sued the New York State Department of Transportation, New York State, and Adesa Corporation. He alleged that he was involved in a motor vehicle accident on February 1, 2017, on the Scajaquada Expressway in Buffalo, New York, and that he suffered multiple injuries and damage to his vehicle. The court had previously allowed him to file without paying the filing fee upfront.
The opinion describes Johnson’s history of filing numerous actions in federal courts arising from vehicle accidents and related disputes. The court considered that history when deciding whether to transfer this case rather than dismiss it.
Venue Analysis
The court applied the federal venue statute. Venue generally is proper where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in limited circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction. Johnson’s complaint concerned events that occurred exclusively in Buffalo, in Erie County. He did not allege that a substantial part of the relevant events occurred in the Southern District of New York. The court therefore found that venue was improper there.
The court considered transferring the case to the United States District Court for the Western District of New York, where Buffalo is located. It declined to transfer the case, finding that transfer was not in the interest of justice in light of Johnson’s litigation history.
Disposition
The court dismissed the complaint without prejudice for improper venue. The opinion states that the court would normally give a self-represented plaintiff an opportunity to amend, but it found that the complaint’s deficiencies could not be cured by amendment and therefore did not provide that opportunity.
The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied Johnson permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The opinion does not describe the specific underlying legal claims in detail.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.