Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 4, 2021

Crichlow v. New York State DOCCS

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:21-cv-04457
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureCivil RightsSection 1983Pro Se
In one sentence

In Crichlow v. New York State DOCCS, Judge Swain transferred the lawsuit to the Northern District of New York because the alleged events occurred there.

Who this affects

Kevin Damion Crichlow's lawsuit was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of New York. The receiving court must decide whether he may proceed without prepaying filing fees.

What happened

In Crichlow v. New York State DOCCS, Kevin Damion Crichlow, who is incarcerated and has no lawyer, sued under a federal civil-rights law, alleging that correctional staff at Eastern New York Correctional Facility violated his rights.

The court ruled that the case was filed in the wrong federal district. Because the alleged events occurred at the facility in Ulster County, the court transferred the action to the Northern District of New York. The transferring court also said that the receiving court would decide whether Crichlow could proceed without paying filing fees.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the transfer, directed that no summons issue from her court, and closed the case there. She also ruled that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Crichlow v. New York State DOCCS · No. 1:21-cv-04457
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 4, 2021

Background

Kevin Damion Crichlow, who is incarcerated at Eastern New York Correctional Facility, brought this action without a lawyer under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He alleged that correctional staff at that facility violated his rights. The defendants are identified in the caption as New York State DOCCS, et al.

Venue

Venue is the federal district where a lawsuit may properly be filed. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391, venue generally is proper where a defendant resides or where a substantial part of the events underlying the claims occurred. The court found that Crichlow did not allege that any defendant resided in the Southern District of New York or that a substantial part of the events occurred there.

The court stated that Eastern New York Correctional Facility is in Ulster County, New York, which is in the Northern District of New York. Because Crichlow's claims arose there, the court determined that venue was proper in the Northern District of New York under § 1391(b)(2).

Ruling

The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the statute allowing transfer when venue is improper. The Clerk was directed to transfer the action, and the court stated that the case was closed in the Southern District of New York. A summons was not to issue from that court.

The court left to the Northern District of New York the decision whether Crichlow could proceed without prepaying filing fees. The opinion notes that a prior related proceeding, No. 15-CV-6587 (W.D.N.Y.), listed enough filing-related strikes to trigger the prisoner filing bar in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), but also notes Crichlow's allegation that he faced imminent danger at Eastern New York Correctional Facility. The court therefore deferred that determination to the receiving court.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain certified that any appeal from the transfer order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

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.