Lojo v. Lopez
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-05056
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Lojo v. Lopez, Judge Swain transferred the civil-rights case to New Jersey because the alleged events occurred there.
Wilson Pena Lojo and the defendants are affected by the transfer of the action from the Southern District of New York to the District of New Jersey. The District of New Jersey will decide whether Lojo may proceed without prepaying filing fees.
What happened
In Lojo v. Lopez, Wilson Pena Lojo, who is incarcerated and representing himself, brought a civil-rights action based on events he says occurred at Essex County Correctional Facility in Newark, New Jersey. The defendants include Lopez, identified as a lieutenant, and other facility employees.
The Southern District of New York transferred the action to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The court found that Newark was where a substantial part of the events occurred and that the documents and witnesses were reasonably expected to be there. It did not decide whether Lojo’s civil-rights claims were valid.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the transfer, directed that no summons issue from her court, and stated that the Southern District of New York case was closed. She also denied permission to proceed without prepaying appeal fees because any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Lojo v. Lopez · No. 1:22-cv-05056
- Laura Swain
- June 16, 2022
Background
Wilson Pena Lojo brought this civil-rights action without a lawyer. He alleged that the defendants violated his rights on May 17, 2019, at Essex County Correctional Facility in Newark, New Jersey. The defendants include Lopez, identified in the caption as a lieutenant of the facility, and other defendants.
Venue analysis
The court applied 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), the federal venue statute. The court explained that a civil action may generally be filed where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, if neither option applies, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction.
Lojo did not provide facts about the defendants’ residences, so the court could not conclude that venue was proper in the Southern District of New York on the basis of the defendants’ residences. But the court found that venue was proper in the District of New Jersey because the alleged events occurred at the facility in Newark, which is in that district.
Transfer decision
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer a case to another district where it could have been brought when transfer would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice. The court concluded that transfer was appropriate because the underlying events occurred in Newark, and relevant documents and witnesses were reasonably expected to be there. The court also noted that there was no indication Lojo resided in the chosen forum and that the operative events did not occur there.
The court therefore transferred the action to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. This was a venue transfer, not a decision on the merits of Lojo’s civil-rights claims.
Other orders and disposition
The Clerk of Court was directed to transfer the action. The court ordered that a summons would not issue from the Southern District of New York and stated that the action was closed in that district. The transferee court would decide whether Lojo could continue without prepaying filing fees. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.