Tobias v. Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation
- Nelson Roman
- 7:20-cv-08539
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Tobias v. Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation, Judge Roman transferred the case to Connecticut because venue was improper in New York.
Deborah Tobias and the defendants—Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation, Greenwich Hospital, Greenwich Pain Consulting Services, Inc., Steven J. Bennett, DO doing business as Greenwich Pain Consulting Services, and Steven J. Bennett, DO—are affected because the action was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the District of Connecticut; any pending motions will be addressed there.
What happened
In Tobias v. Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation, Deborah Tobias sued Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation and the other defendants over medical malpractice, negligence, informed consent, and related claims.
The court found that all defendants resided in Greenwich, Connecticut, and that a substantial part of the events occurred there. Tobias’s residence in Westchester County, New York, did not by itself make venue proper in the Southern District of New York.
Judge Roman transferred the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut. The court directed the Clerk to transfer the file, and any pending motions will be addressed by the receiving court.
The detailed version
- Tobias v. Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation · No. 7:20-cv-08539
- Nelson Roman
- Apr. 19, 2022
Background
Deborah Tobias brought a diversity action under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 against Yale New Haven Health Services Corporation, Greenwich Hospital, Greenwich Pain Consulting Services, Inc., Steven J. Bennett, DO doing business as Greenwich Pain Consulting Services, and Steven J. Bennett, DO. She asserted claims for medical malpractice, negligence, gross negligence, lack of informed consent, and breach of fiduciary duty.
Tobias alleged that venue was proper in the Southern District of New York because she resided in Westchester County, New York, while the defendants resided in Connecticut. The court reviewed the complaint and found that it alleged all defendants resided in Greenwich, Connecticut, and that a substantial part of the events or omissions underlying the claims occurred there.
Venue Analysis
The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), which permits a civil action to be filed in certain districts connected to the defendants or the events giving rise to the claims. The court concluded that Tobias’s residence in Westchester County was the only connection to the Southern District of New York and that her residence alone did not establish proper venue there.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), when venue is improper, a court may dismiss the case or transfer it to a district where it could have been brought if transfer serves the interests of justice. The court determined that transfer was appropriate.
Ruling
The court TRANSFERS the action to the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The Clerk was directed to transfer the file, and the transferee court will address any pending motions. The opinion did not decide the merits of Tobias’s underlying claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.