Ekeoma v. The City of New York
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-00474
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Ekeoma v. City of New York, Judge Schofield transferred the action to the Eastern District of New York and denied appeal fee-waiver status.
Amarachukwu Ekeoma's action was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. The City of New York and the New York City Police Department were the named defendants; the court also noted that the Police Department is not a suable entity.
What happened
In Ekeoma v. The City of New York, Amarachukwu Ekeoma, representing himself, alleged that unnamed police officers used excessive force and wrongfully arrested him at his home in Queens County, New York. He sued the City of New York and the New York City Police Department.
The court determined that the Eastern District of New York was a proper venue because the alleged events occurred there. It also noted that relevant witnesses and documents were likely located there and that the events had no apparent connection to the Southern District of New York.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered the case transferred to the Eastern District of New York and directed the clerk to close the case in the Southern District. The court also directed that no summons issue and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Ekeoma v. The City of New York · No. 1:23-cv-00474
- Lorna Schofield
- Jan. 26, 2023
Background
Amarachukwu Ekeoma brought the action without a lawyer against the City of New York and the New York City Police Department. He alleged that unnamed police officers used excessive force against him and wrongfully arrested him at his home in Jamaica, Queens County, New York. The opinion states that Ekeoma paid $402 to bring the action.
The court noted that the New York City Police Department is an agency of the City and is not an entity that can be sued. The order did not separately state a dismissal or other disposition of the claims against the Police Department.
Venue and Transfer
Venue means the federal district where a case may properly be heard. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1391, venue may be proper where a substantial part of the events occurred. The court concluded that venue was proper in the Eastern District of New York because the alleged events occurred in Queens County. The court also stated that the City of New York and the Police Department could be considered residents of both districts for purposes of being sued, making the Southern District of New York an appropriate venue as well.
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 considered the location of the alleged events and concluded that relevant documents and witnesses were likely in the Eastern District. It also found that the operative facts appeared to have no connection to the Southern District. Based on the total circumstances, the court determined that transfer was appropriate.
Ruling
Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered the clerk to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York and to close the case in the Southern District of New York. The court stated that a summons would not issue from the Southern District. It also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.