Strachn v. City of New York
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:19-cv-11086
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Strachn v. City of New York, Chief Judge McMahon transferred the pro se civil-rights action to the Eastern District of New York.
Kawahn Strachn's action was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. The receiving court would decide whether he could proceed without prepaying fees, while the Southern District denied fee-free status for an appeal.
What happened
In Strachn v. City of New York, Kawahn Strachn brought a self-represented civil-rights action under federal law, alleging that Department of Homeless Services officers violated his rights at a shelter in Brooklyn. He sued the City of New York.
Although venue was proper in the Southern District, the court found the Eastern District more appropriate because the events, arrest, prosecution, and records were connected to Kings County, and Strachn resides in Queens County. The City is also located within the Eastern District.
Chief Judge Colleen McMahon ordered the case transferred to the Eastern District of New York and closed the Southern District case. She also directed that any decision about proceeding without paying filing fees be made by the receiving court and denied self-represented fee-free status for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Strachn v. City of New York · No. 1:19-cv-11086
- Colleen McMahon
- Dec. 6, 2019
Background
Kawahn Strachn brought this self-represented action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims for violations of constitutional or federal rights by officials acting under state law. He alleged that officers from the Department of Homeless Services violated his rights at a shelter in Brooklyn. The City of New York was the named defendant.
Venue and transfer
The court explained that venue—the proper federal district for a case—was allowed in the Southern District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) because the City of New York is located there. But 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) allows a court to transfer a case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. A court may order that transfer on its own initiative.
The court concluded that transfer was appropriate for several reasons. The City is also located within the Eastern District. The underlying events occurred in Brooklyn, which is in Kings County, making venue proper there based on where the events occurred. Strachn was arrested and prosecuted in Kings County, and the related criminal-proceeding and arrest records were located there. Strachn resides in Queens County, which is also in the Eastern District, and he gave no reason for filing in the Southern District.
Ruling and effect
Based on the total circumstances, the court ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Southern District court closed the case, directed that the matter be assigned to Judge McMahon's docket for transfer purposes, and ordered that a copy of the order be mailed to Strachn. It stated that the receiving court would decide whether Strachn could continue without paying fees. No summons would issue from the Southern District.
The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion did not decide the merits of Strachn's civil-rights allegations.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.