Hirsch v. Butterman
- Rochon
- 1:22-cv-07897
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
Hirsch v. Butterman: Judge Rochon transferred the case to the Eastern District of New York for convenience and justice.
Elliot M. Hirsch and defendants Jay R. Butterman and Elizabeth M. Kairey; the case was transferred to the Eastern District of New York, which will decide the preliminary-injunction request.
What happened
In Hirsch v. Butterman, Elliot M. Hirsch, representing himself, sued Jay R. Butterman and Elizabeth M. Kairey over alleged defamation, emotional distress, and a conspiracy. He also asked for a preliminary injunction.
Judge Rochon found that both the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York were proper places for the case. She concluded that the Eastern District was more convenient because the relevant events, witnesses, documents, and Kairey’s residence were connected to Kings County, and related cases were pending there.
The court directed the Clerk to transfer the case to the Eastern District of New York, where the request for a preliminary injunction will be decided. Judge Rochon also directed that no summons issue from the Southern District and denied the plaintiff permission to proceed without paying fees for an appeal.
The detailed version
- Hirsch v. Butterman · No. 1:22-cv-07897
- Rochon
- Sept. 26, 2022
Background
Elliot M. Hirsch brought the action without a lawyer against Jay R. Butterman, an attorney, and Elizabeth M. Kairey. The claims were for defamation, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and civil conspiracy. Hirsch also filed an application seeking a preliminary injunction, which is a request for an early court order requiring or preventing certain conduct. The court had previously granted Hirsch permission to proceed without paying filing fees.
Venue and transfer analysis
The court held that venue was proper in both the Southern District of New York and the Eastern District of New York. Under the federal venue statute, venue was proper because the defendants were alleged to reside in New York State and because substantial events connected to the claims occurred in both districts.
The court identified connections to Kings County, in the Eastern District, including the state-court civil actions involving the parties, the notarization of Kairey’s affidavit, and the location of at least some recipients of Butterman’s email. The court also noted that Kairey resided in Kings County, that likely witnesses and evidence were located there, and that related cases were pending in the Eastern District. Hirsch’s choice of the Southern District received less weight because the opinion states that he resided in New Jersey rather than in that district.
Applying the federal transfer statute, which allows a case to be moved for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice, the court concluded that transfer to the Eastern District was appropriate.
Ruling
Judge Rochon directed the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Eastern District will decide whether to grant Hirsch’s application for a preliminary injunction. The Southern District ordered that no summons issue from that court and stated that the case was closed there. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.