Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 22, 2020

Chisolm-Mitchell v. Advantage Care Physician

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-05468
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Chisolm-Mitchell v. Advantage Care Physician, Chief Judge McMahon transferred the constitutional-rights action to the Eastern District of New York because Queens was the proper venue.

Who this affects

Donna M. Chisolm-Mitchell, David A. Chisolm-Mitchell, and the defendants were affected by the transfer of the action from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. The receiving court would decide whether the plaintiffs could proceed without prepaying filing fees.

What happened

In Chisolm-Mitchell v. Advantage Care Physician, Donna M. Chisolm-Mitchell and David A. Chisolm-Mitchell brought a self-represented constitutional-rights lawsuit against Doctor Najma Ahmed, Advantage Care Physician, and Detective Raymond Abear. They said the events occurred in Forest Hills and Jamaica, in Queens County, and listed work addresses for the defendants there.

The Southern District of New York said venue did not appear proper there because the defendants and events were connected to Queens County. The court also concluded that transferring the case would be more convenient and serve the interests of justice because Queens County is in the Eastern District of New York.

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon ordered the case transferred to the Eastern District of New York and closed the Southern District case. She left the decision about whether the plaintiffs could proceed without paying filing fees to the receiving court, and denied fee-free status for any appeal from this order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Chisolm-Mitchell v. Advantage Care Physician · No. 1:20-cv-05468
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
July 22, 2020

Background

Donna M. Chisolm-Mitchell and David A. Chisolm-Mitchell filed a self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of their federal constitutional rights. The defendants were Doctor Najma Ahmed, Advantage Care Physician, and Detective Raymond Abear of the NYPD 112th Precinct. The opinion notes that although both Donna M. Chisolm-Mitchell and David A. Chisolm-Mitchell were listed as plaintiffs, only Donna M. Chisolm-Mitchell signed the complaint and the application to proceed without paying filing fees.

The complaint concerned events in Forest Hills and Jamaica, which are in Queens County, New York. The plaintiffs listed work addresses for the defendants in Queens County.

Venue and Transfer

The court explained that federal law generally permits a civil action to be filed where all defendants reside, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, if neither applies, where a defendant is subject to the court’s authority. The court concluded that venue did not appear proper in the Southern District of New York because the plaintiffs did not allege that the defendants resided there or that a substantial part of the relevant events occurred there.

The court also considered transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which permits a court to transfer a case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. It considered the location of the events, the plaintiffs’ residence, and the defendants’ work locations. Because those connections were in Queens County, and Queens County is in the Eastern District of New York, the court determined that transfer was appropriate.

Disposition

The court ordered the Clerk to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York and stated that the order closed the Southern District case. The receiving court would decide whether the plaintiffs could continue without prepaying filing fees. The court also directed that no summons issue from the Southern District of New York.

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied the plaintiffs permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The order transferred the case based on venue and convenience; it did not decide the alleged constitutional violations.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.