Garanin v. Vayner
- Paul Gardephe
- 1:20-cv-07300
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Garanin v. Vayner, Judge Gardephe transferred the case to the Eastern District of New York because venue was improper in the Southern District.
The transfer affects Vsevolod Garanin, Dr. Ilya Elliot Vayner M.D., and the Office of Elliot Vayner M.D., F.A.A.P. The case was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York; the order did not decide the underlying claims.
What happened
Garanin v. Vayner involved Vsevolod Garanin, who represented himself and brought federal claims against Dr. Ilya Elliot Vayner and the Office of Elliot Vayner M.D., F.A.A.P. Garanin alleged that the defendants resided on Staten Island and that the events underlying his claims occurred there.
The court determined that Staten Island is in Richmond County, which is part of the Eastern District of New York, not the Southern District of New York. Because Garanin did not allege that either defendant resided in the Southern District or that substantial events occurred there, the court found that venue was improper.
Judge Paul G. Gardephe ordered the Clerk to transfer the case to the Eastern District of New York under federal venue law. The order closed the action in the Southern District and denied fee-free appeal status because the court certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Garanin v. Vayner · No. 1:20-cv-07300
- Paul Gardephe
- Sept. 11, 2020
Background
Vsevolod Garanin appeared without a lawyer and asserted federal claims, including claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985 and 45 C.F.R. § 164.502(g), against Dr. Ilya Elliot Vayner M.D. and the Office of Elliot Vayner M.D., F.A.A.P. Garanin alleged that both defendants resided on Staten Island and that the events giving rise to his claims occurred there.
The court also noted that Garanin's complaint included the full names and complete birth dates of his minor children. Because court rules limit the disclosure of minors' names and individuals' birth years, the court directed the Clerk to restrict electronic access to the complaint to case participants.
Venue Analysis
Federal law permits a civil action to be filed where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the relevant events occurred, or, in some circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction. For venue purposes, Staten Island is in Richmond County. The Southern District of New York does not include Richmond County, while the Eastern District of New York does.
The court concluded that venue was not proper in the Southern District under the provisions based on the defendants' residence or the location of the events. It determined that venue lay in the Eastern District because Garanin alleged that the defendants resided in Richmond County and that the relevant events occurred there.
Disposition
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Clerk was directed to make the transfer, and the order states that the Southern District action was closed. The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal. Judge Paul G. Gardephe did not decide the merits of Garanin's underlying claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.