Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 8, 2022

Rain v. The City of New York

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:22-cv-03354
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Rain v. City of New York: Judge Swain transferred the pro se action to the Eastern District of New York because the alleged events occurred in Brooklyn.

Who this affects

Jyrah Rain’s action against the City of New York was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York; the order did not resolve the underlying allegations.

What happened

In Rain v. The City of New York, Jyrah Rain, representing herself, alleged that the City violated her rights in Brooklyn, New York, on January 27, 2022.

The court explained that Brooklyn is in the Eastern District of New York and that the City of New York can be sued in both districts. It also concluded that relevant witnesses and documents were likely located in the Eastern District.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the case transferred to the Eastern District of New York in the interest of justice. The Southern District case was closed, no summons would issue from that court, and the court denied fee-free status for any appeal from the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Rain v. The City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-03354
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
June 8, 2022

Background

Jyrah Rain brought this pro se action against only the City of New York. She alleged that the City violated her rights in Brooklyn, Kings County, New York, on January 27, 2022.

Venue Analysis

The court explained that federal venue may be proper where a defendant resides or where a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred. The City of New York resides in both the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. Brooklyn is located in the Eastern District of New York, so that district was a proper venue based both on the City’s residence and on the location of the alleged events.

Transfer

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer a case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. The court determined that transfer was appropriate because the events underlying Rain’s claims occurred in the Eastern District and relevant documents and witnesses were likely located there. Based on the overall circumstances, the court ordered the action transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Disposition

Judge Laura Taylor Swain directed the Clerk of Court to transfer the action. The court stated that the transferee court would decide whether Rain could continue without prepaying fees. The Southern District court would not issue a summons, 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. The order did not decide the merits of Rain’s allegations.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.