Lurch, Jr. v. Bernal
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-09329
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Judge McMahon transferred Lurch, Jr. v. Bernal to New Jersey because the alleged events occurred there and venue was improper in New York.
Robert Derek Lurch Jr.'s case was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the District of New Jersey; the transferee court will decide whether he may proceed without prepaying fees.
What happened
In Lurch, Jr. v. Bernal, Robert Derek Lurch Jr., representing himself, alleged that defendants falsely arrested him, used excessive force, and forcibly medicated him in Newark, New Jersey. The court had previously reconsidered its three-strikes ruling and determined that Lurch was not barred from filing this action without paying filing fees when he filed it.
The court then considered where the case could properly be heard. Because Lurch alleged that the events occurred in Newark and did not allege that a defendant lived in the Southern District of New York or that events connected to his claims occurred there, the court found that venue was improper in New York.
Judge McMahon directed the Clerk to transfer the action to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey under the federal venue-transfer statute. The New Jersey court will decide whether Lurch may continue without paying filing fees; no summons issued from the New York court, and the order closed the case there.
The detailed version
- Lurch, Jr. v. Bernal · No. 1:20-cv-09329
- Colleen McMahon
- Mar. 29, 2022
Background
Robert Derek Lurch Jr. brought this action representing himself. He alleged that defendants falsely arrested him and used excessive force on September 26, 2020, and forcibly medicated him on September 27, 2020, in Newark, New Jersey.
The court had initially held that Lurch was barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), part of the Prison Litigation Reform Act's three-strikes provision, from filing additional actions without prepaying fees while he was incarcerated. Lurch later sought reconsideration. After reviewing his clarification and an earlier related proceeding, the court vacated its prior denial of reconsideration, granted reconsideration, and held that Lurch was not barred by § 1915(g) from filing this action without prepaying fees when he filed it.
Venue
The court examined the federal venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). That statute generally permits a civil action to be brought where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in certain circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction. The court found that Lurch did not allege that any defendant resided in the Southern District of New York or that a substantial part of the relevant events occurred there.
Because the alleged conduct occurred in Newark, the court determined that the claims arose in the District of New Jersey and that venue lay there under § 1391(b)(2). It therefore transferred the action to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), the statute permitting transfer when venue is improper.
Disposition
The court directed the Clerk to transfer the action to the District of New Jersey. It stated that the transferee court would decide whether Lurch could proceed without prepaying fees. A summons would not issue from the Southern District of New York, and the order closed the case in that court. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.