Smith v. PacerMonitor, LLC
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:19-cv-11849
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 7
In Smith v. PacerMonitor, LLC, Judge Cott ordered the case transferred to Oklahoma because New York was not connected to the claims.
Pamela Smith’s case was directed for transfer from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of Oklahoma, subject to her opportunity to object. The order did not decide the merits of her claims against PacerMonitor, LLC, the Oklahoma Attorney General, or the Tulsa County District Attorney.
What happened
In Smith v. PacerMonitor, LLC, Pamela Smith, representing herself, sued PacerMonitor, LLC, the Oklahoma Attorney General, and the Tulsa County District Attorney. She claimed that the defendants violated her constitutional rights and asserted other claims connected to her Oklahoma lawsuits and events in Oklahoma.
The court found that New York was not the proper or convenient location for the case. Smith lived in Oklahoma, the events occurred in Oklahoma, most defendants were in Oklahoma, and the related lawsuits were in Oklahoma federal courts. Smith identified no connection to the Southern District of New York.
Magistrate Judge James L. Cott ordered the case transferred to the Northern District of Oklahoma, subject to a 17-day period for Smith to object. The court did not decide whether Smith’s claims were legally valid.
The detailed version
- Smith v. PacerMonitor, LLC · No. 1:19-cv-11849
- Paul Engelmayer
- Feb. 12, 2020
Background
Pamela Smith, proceeding without a lawyer, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 against PacerMonitor, LLC, the Oklahoma Attorney General, and the Tulsa County District Attorney. She alleged unlawful deprivation of rights, conspiracy to interfere with rights, intentional infliction of emotional distress, disparate treatment based on race, and defamation. Her allegations concerned events in Oklahoma and lawsuits she had brought in the Northern and Western Districts of Oklahoma.
The case was filed in the Southern District of New York. Judge Paul A. Engelmayer referred it to Magistrate Judge James L. Cott for general pretrial supervision. Judge Cott raised the venue issue and gave Smith an opportunity to explain why the case should not be transferred to an Oklahoma federal district.
Venue
Venue concerns the proper federal district for a lawsuit. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), venue generally may be proper where defendants reside, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in limited circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction.
The complaint listed addresses for PacerMonitor in New York, New York, the Oklahoma Attorney General in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and the Tulsa County District Attorney in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The court stated that Smith’s complaint concerned events at her residence in Tulsa, which is in the Northern District of Oklahoma, and her lawsuits in the Northern and Western Districts of Oklahoma. Because Smith did not allege that all defendants resided in New York or that a substantial part of the events occurred in the Southern District of New York, the court concluded that venue did not appear proper there under § 1391(b)(1) or (2).
Transfer Analysis
The court also held that transfer was appropriate even if venue were proper in New York. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer a case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. The court considered the relevant transfer factors, including witness and party convenience, the location of the events and evidence, the forum’s familiarity with the governing law, trial efficiency, and the interest of justice.
The court found that the transfer factors favored the Northern District of Oklahoma or were neutral. Smith lived there, the underlying events occurred in Oklahoma, all defendants except PacerMonitor resided in Oklahoma according to the complaint, and a related federal matter involving Smith was pending there. The court also noted that Smith’s filings did not identify any connection to the Southern District of New York.
Disposition
The court concluded that the action should be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. The court delayed issuing the transfer to give Smith 17 days, including weekends and holidays, to file objections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a). The opinion states that, if no objections were filed, the clerk would effectuate the transfer by a separate order issued after March 2, 2020. The court did not reach the merits of Smith’s claims.
Judge and Referral
The transfer order was decided and signed by United States Magistrate Judge James L. Cott. The opinion states that District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer had referred the case to Judge Cott for general pretrial supervision.
Read the full 7-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.