Lawtone-Bowles v. Liberty University

Background

Nicole Lawtone-Bowles filed the action without a lawyer. The court understood her complaint as asserting claims under Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972 and/or Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The defendants were Liberty University, the Liberty University School of Health Sciences, Brendan Haynie, identified as the School of Health Sciences’ “Online Chair,” and Grant M. Rost, identified as an associate professor of law at Liberty University.

The court had previously granted Lawtone-Bowles permission to proceed without prepaying the filing fee. Her allegations concerned online courses, grading disputes, and email disputes with Liberty University faculty and other officials.

Venue and Proposed Transfer

Venue is the legally proper federal district for a case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391, a case may generally be brought where all defendants reside, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, if neither applies, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction.

Lawtone-Bowles did not allege that any defendant resided in the Southern District of New York or elsewhere in New York. She alleged that Liberty University and the School of Health Sciences were located in Lynchburg, Campbell County, Virginia, and appeared to allege that Haynie and Rost were also in that city and county. Campbell County is in the Western District of Virginia.

She also alleged that events giving rise to her claims occurred in Highland Falls and West Point, New York, which are in Orange County and the Southern District of New York. The court therefore stated that the Western District of Virginia appeared to be a proper venue and that the Southern District of New York might also be proper.

The court said it was inclined, in the interest of justice, to transfer the action to the Western District of Virginia under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). That statute allows transfer to another district where the case could have been brought when transfer would be more convenient for the parties and witnesses and would serve the interests of justice. The court identified the convenience of witnesses and parties, the location of relevant documents, and the weight to give Lawtone-Bowles’s choice of venue as relevant considerations.

Order

The court directed Lawtone-Bowles to show cause—that is, explain—by declaration within 30 days why the case should not be transferred to the Western District of Virginia. The order did not transfer the case at that time. It stated that the court would transfer the action if she failed to file a declaration on time or failed to show adequate cause against transfer.

The court also denied Lawtone-Bowles’s motion for permission to file electronically without prejudice because she had not provided all information required by the motion form. “Without prejudice” means the order did not bar her from filing another completed motion form.

Finally, the court certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.