Cruz v. I.C.M. Manhattan, NY
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:20-cv-04392
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Cruz v. I.C. Metro: Judge Brann transferred Cruz’s civil-rights complaint to New York, deferred pending motions, and closed the Pennsylvania case.
Abraham Cruz’s civil-rights case was transferred from the Middle District of Pennsylvania to the Southern District of New York; the receiving court was left to decide his pending requests to proceed without prepaying filing fees and for appointed counsel.
What happened
In Abraham Cruz v. I.C. Metro, Manhattan, New York, et al., Cruz alleged that his constitutional rights were violated while he was incarcerated at a federal prison in New York City. A magistrate judge recommended transferring the case to the Southern District of New York because that was where the relevant events occurred.
Cruz objected, arguing that venue was proper in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. The court reviewed the recommendation and found no error in the conclusion that venue was improper there.
The court adopted the recommendation, transferred the complaint to the Southern District of New York, deferred decisions on Cruz’s requests to proceed without prepaying filing fees and for appointed counsel, and directed the clerk to close the Pennsylvania case. Judge Matthew W. Brann signed the order.
The detailed version
- Cruz v. I.C.M. Manhattan, NY · No. 1:20-cv-04392
- Valerie Caproni
- June 8, 2020
Background
Abraham Cruz filed a civil-rights complaint alleging that his constitutional rights were violated during his incarceration at a federal prison in New York City, New York. Chief Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that the case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York because venue properly belonged there.
Cruz’s Objections
Cruz timely objected to the recommendation. He argued that venue was proper in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Because he objected, the district judge was required to independently review the challenged parts of the recommendation. The court also had authority to accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
Court’s Analysis
The court found no error in the conclusion that venue was improper in the Middle District of Pennsylvania. It agreed that the Southern District of New York was the proper district because a substantial part of the events or omissions underlying Cruz’s claims occurred there.
Disposition
Judge Matthew W. Brann ordered that Chief Magistrate Judge Susan E. Schwab’s Report and Recommendation be adopted. The clerk was directed to transfer the complaint to the Southern District of New York. The transferee court was to decide Cruz’s pending request to proceed without prepaying filing fees and his requests for appointment of counsel. The clerk was also directed to close the Middle District of Pennsylvania case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.