Buckner v. The State of Pennsylvania

Background

Shatasia Buckner, who resides in Brooklyn, New York, filed this pro se action—meaning she was not represented by a lawyer—in the Southern District of New York. She invoked federal-question jurisdiction and named the State of Pennsylvania, Luzerne County Family Court, Stefanie J. Salavantis, Chanel Buckner, and Russell Luke King as defendants. The claims concern child-custody proceedings in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.

Venue analysis

Federal law generally permits a civil case to proceed in a district where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the relevant events occurred, or, when neither of those options is available, where a defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction. The opinion states that Buckner alleged that the State of Pennsylvania, Luzerne County Family Court, Salavantis, and Chanel Buckner were located in Pennsylvania, and that King resided in New Jersey. She did not allege that any defendant resided in the Southern District of New York or that a substantial part of the events occurred there. The court therefore concluded that venue did not appear proper in that district.

Disposition

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), a court may transfer a case filed in the wrong venue when transfer is in the interest of justice. Because the alleged events occurred in Luzerne County, which is in the Middle District of Pennsylvania, the court directed the Clerk to transfer the action there. This was a transfer order, not a decision on the merits of Buckner’s claims. The order closed the action in the Southern District of New York, stated that summonses would not issue from that court, and left any decision about proceeding without prepayment of fees to the transferee court. Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for an appeal.