WILSON v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.

Background

Wanda Wilson sued JPMorgan Chase and James Dimon, along with unidentified defendants and entities. Her amended complaint alleged employment race discrimination, a racially hostile work environment, and retaliation under the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights Law. She alleged that she worked at JPMorgan Chase’s executive offices in New York City before her termination.

The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(2), (3), and (6), or alternatively to transfer the case to the Southern District of New York. Rule 12(b)(3) concerns improper venue, meaning that the case was filed in a district that does not meet the federal venue requirements. The court had previously dismissed Wilson’s original complaint for failure to state a claim but allowed her to amend it. The amended complaint replaced the New Jersey-law claims with New York-law claims and alleged that Wilson worked in New York.

Waiver of the Venue Defense

Wilson argued that the defendants had waived their right to challenge venue because they did not raise improper venue in their first motion to dismiss. The court rejected that argument. It reasoned that the original complaint did not clearly identify where the alleged wrongful conduct occurred, while the amended complaint identified New York as the location of Wilson’s work and asserted only New York-law claims. Because the venue defense was not a legitimate or available defense based on the original complaint’s allegations, the court concluded that the defendants had not waived it.

Venue Analysis

The court concluded that New Jersey was not a proper venue under the applicable federal venue provisions. It noted that the defendants represented that Dimon was domiciled in New York, and Wilson provided no facts showing otherwise. The court therefore found that New Jersey was not proper under the provision concerning an individual defendant’s residence.

The court also determined that a substantial part of the events underlying Wilson’s claims occurred in New York, not New Jersey. The alleged hostile-work-environment conduct occurred at JPMorgan Chase’s executive offices in New York City. Town Hall meetings at which Dimon invited employees to contact him about employment issues also occurred in New York. The decisions concerning Wilson’s long-term leave and termination were made in New York.

Wilson argued that New Jersey was proper because most communications between her and JPMorgan Chase after June 14, 2018, occurred while she was at her New Jersey home. The court found that these communications did not constitute a substantial part of the alleged wrongful conduct. Because an action could have been brought in the Southern District of New York, the court also found that the provision allowing venue where no other district is available did not apply.

Disposition

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), a court may dismiss a case filed in an improper venue or, in the interest of justice, transfer it to a district where the case could have been brought. The court stated that transfer is generally preferred over dismissal in these circumstances. It therefore transferred the matter to the Southern District of New York.

The court’s conclusion was specific: the defendants’ motion to dismiss was granted as to the venue argument; the case was transferred under § 1406(a); and the remainder of the motion to dismiss was denied without prejudice. The court did not address the defendants’ arguments under Rules 12(b)(2) and 12(b)(6), or their request to change venue under § 1404(a).