Cropper v. Commissioner of Social Security
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-01836
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Cropper v. Commissioner of Social Security, Judge McMahon transferred the benefits-review case to the Eastern District of New York because venue was improper.
Eugene Cropper’s Social Security benefits-review action was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York; the merits were not decided.
What happened
In Cropper v. Commissioner of Social Security, Eugene Cropper, representing himself, asked for review of a Social Security benefits decision under federal law.
The court found that venue was improper in the Southern District of New York because Cropper alleged that he lived in Brooklyn, which is in the Eastern District of New York, and did not allege a principal place of business.
Judge McMahon transferred the action to the Eastern District of New York and closed the case in the Southern District. The court left any decision about proceeding without paying filing fees to the receiving court and denied that status for an appeal from the transfer order.
The detailed version
- Cropper v. Commissioner of Social Security · No. 1:20-cv-01836
- Colleen McMahon
- Mar. 3, 2020
Background
Eugene Cropper filed a self-represented action seeking judicial review of the Commissioner of Social Security’s decision concerning his application for Social Security benefits. He relied on sections 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) of the Social Security Act.
Venue analysis
The court explained that an action under those provisions may be brought only in the federal judicial district where the plaintiff resides or has his principal place of business, or, if neither is in a federal judicial district, in the District of Columbia. Cropper alleged that he resided in Brooklyn, Kings County, New York. He did not allege a principal place of business.
Because Kings County is within the Eastern District of New York, the court determined that venue was not proper in the Southern District of New York and that venue lay in the Eastern District of New York.
Ruling and case status
The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The Clerk was directed to mail Cropper a copy of the order and transfer the action. The court stated that the receiving court would decide whether Cropper could proceed without prepaying fees. No summons was to issue from the Southern District, and the order closed the case there.
Judge Colleen McMahon also certified that an appeal from the transfer order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of that appeal. The order did not decide the merits of Cropper’s challenge to the Social Security benefits decision.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.