Grossman v. Citibank, N.A.

Background

Charles Grossman filed a state-court action in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Westchester, asserting claims for breach of contract and negligence against Citibank, N.A. Citibank removed the action to the Southern District of New York under 28 U.S.C. § 1441.

Venue analysis

Federal venue law generally permits a civil action to proceed in a district where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred, or, when no other district qualifies, where the defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction for the action.

The court concluded that venue was improper in the Southern District. Citibank did not represent that it was a resident of the Northern Counties of the Southern District of New York. The opinion states that Grossman resided in Great Neck, New York, in Nassau County, and that a substantial part of the events or omissions underlying the claims occurred there. The court also found that Citibank’s offices in Westchester County were not connected to the claims.

Disposition

Judge Nelson S. Roman TRANSFERS the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The Clerk was directed to transfer the file, and the Eastern District of New York will address any pending motions.