Reeves v. New York City Housing Authority
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-03820
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Reeves v. New York City Housing Authority, Judge Swain transferred the action to the Eastern District of New York and reserved further decisions.
Michael Reeves’s case was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York. The receiving court will decide his requests to proceed without prepaying fees and for preliminary injunctive relief.
What happened
Reeves v. New York City Housing Authority concerns Michael Reeves’s claims that the defendants discriminated against him because of his disability in connection with a housing voucher and possible eviction proceedings in Brooklyn. Reeves represented himself and sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Housing Act, and state law.
The court found that the case could have been brought in the Eastern District of New York because the events occurred in Brooklyn, where Reeves’s apartment and likely eviction proceedings were located. It concluded that the Eastern District appeared more convenient because relevant witnesses and documents were likely there, and Reeves did not live in the Southern District or experience the events there.
Judge Swain ordered the case transferred to the Eastern District of New York. The receiving court will decide whether Reeves may proceed without paying filing fees and whether to grant his request for preliminary relief; the Southern District closed the case, issued no summons, and denied fee-free status for an appeal from this order.
The detailed version
- Reeves v. New York City Housing Authority · No. 1:23-cv-03820
- Laura Swain
- May 9, 2023
Background
Michael Reeves, who resides in Brooklyn, brought the action without a lawyer against the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA), NYCHA Housing Assistant Jacqueline Haynes, and NYCHA Assistant Director of Leased Housing Jourdan Neal-Grant. He alleged disability discrimination involving a NYCHA housing voucher for his Brooklyn apartment. His claims arose under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Housing Act, and state law. He also suggested that he had received eviction orders, apparently connected to proceedings in Brooklyn.
Venue analysis
The court explained that the federal venue statute permits a civil action to proceed in a district where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in limited circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction. The court stated that venue appeared proper in both the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York under the defendant-residence provision. It also concluded that venue was proper in the Eastern District under the events-based provision because the alleged discrimination occurred in Brooklyn. Brooklyn is in Kings County, which is part of the Eastern District.
Transfer decision
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer a case, even when venue is proper, to another district where the case could have been brought when transfer would promote the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice. The court considered the location of the events, likely witnesses and documents, and the reduced weight given to Reeves’s choice of the Southern District because he did not reside there and the operative events did not occur there. It concluded that the Eastern District appeared to be the more convenient forum.
Disposition
The court ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. It reserved for the transferee court the decisions on whether Reeves could proceed without prepaying fees and on his request for preliminary injunctive relief. The court directed that no summons issue from the Southern District and stated that the order closed the case in that court. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain did not decide the merits of Reeves’s discrimination claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.