Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 29, 2020

Howard v. Vedder

Judge
Colleen McMahon
Docket
1:20-cv-07743
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Howard v. Vedder, Chief Judge McMahon transferred Howard’s civil-rights action to the Northern District of New York because venue was improper in the Southern District.

Who this affects

The order moved Charles Howard’s action against E. Vedder and the other defendants from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of New York. The transferee court will decide whether Howard may proceed without prepaying fees.

What happened

Howard, who was incarcerated at Great Meadow Correctional Facility and representing himself, sued E. Vedder and other defendants under a federal civil-rights law. He alleged that his rights were violated at Great Meadow.

The court ruled that the Southern District of New York was not the proper venue because Howard did not allege that a defendant lived there or that substantial events related to his claims occurred there. Great Meadow is in Washington County, which is in the Northern District of New York.

Chief Judge Colleen McMahon transferred the action to the Northern District of New York. The receiving court will decide whether Howard may proceed without paying filing fees; the Southern District court did not issue a summons, closed its case, and denied fee-free status for any appeal from the transfer order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Howard v. Vedder · No. 1:20-cv-07743
Judge
Colleen McMahon
Date
Sept. 29, 2020

Background

Charles Howard, who was incarcerated at Great Meadow Correctional Facility and proceeding without a lawyer, brought an action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against E. Vedder and other defendants. Howard alleged that the defendants violated his rights at Great Meadow.

Venue analysis

The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), which identifies where a civil action may be filed. Relevant here, venue is proper in a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. The court found that Howard did not allege that any defendant resided in the Southern District of New York or that a substantial part of the events related to his claims occurred there.

The court determined that Howard’s claims arose at Great Meadow in Washington County. Washington County is in the Northern District of New York, so venue lies there under § 1391(b)(2).

Disposition

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. The Southern District court directed the Clerk to mail Howard the order, transfer the action, and terminate all motions. It stated that the transferee court would decide whether Howard could proceed without prepaying fees. No summons was to issue from the Southern District court, and the order closed that court’s case.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.