Madson v. Case
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-04873
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Madson v. Case, Judge Swain transferred the employment lawsuit from New York to Illinois because venue was improper there.
Joshua Olin Madson’s lawsuit was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of Illinois. The transfer concerned venue and did not decide the merits of his claims against Gregory C. Case.
What happened
In Madson v. Case, Joshua Olin Madson, representing himself, sued Gregory C. Case under Title VII and 42 U.S.C. § 1981 over employment-related events involving Aon’s Chicago office. The opinion states that Case was identified as residing in London and that Aon was located in Chicago.
The court ruled that the Southern District of New York was not the proper venue. It found that the Title VII and Section 1981 claims arose from events at Aon’s Chicago office, making the Northern District of Illinois the proper venue.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain transferred the action to the Northern District of Illinois in the interest of justice and closed the case in her court. She also ruled that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.
The detailed version
- Madson v. Case · No. 1:23-cv-04873
- Laura Swain
- Aug. 1, 2023
Background
Joshua Olin Madson brought this case without a lawyer under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. He alleged that the claims arose from his employment with Aon at its Chicago, Illinois office. He named Gregory C. Case as the defendant and stated that Case resided at an address in London, England. Madson also stated that Aon was located in Chicago.
The court noted in a footnote that the proper defendant for a Title VII claim is the employer, rather than an individual. The court also referred to an earlier, unrelated case in which it had told Madson that his Title VII claims had to be brought against his employer, not individual defendants. The opinion does not decide whether Madson stated a valid claim or whether the Title VII defendant was properly named.
Venue Analysis
Venue is the proper federal court location for a lawsuit. The court held that venue was not proper in the Southern District of New York for either set of claims. Title VII’s venue rule permits an employment-discrimination case in the district where the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred, where relevant employment records are maintained, where the person would have worked, or, in certain circumstances, where the defendant’s principal office is located. Because Madson alleged that he worked at Aon’s Chicago office, the court concluded that the Title VII claims had to be brought in the Northern District of Illinois.
For the Section 1981 claims, the court applied the general federal venue statute. It concluded that a substantial part of the events giving rise to those claims occurred at the Chicago office, so venue was proper in the Northern District of Illinois. The court stated that the venue provision based on a defendant’s residence did not appear to apply because Case presumably resided in London and not within a United States judicial district.
Disposition
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), when a case is filed in the wrong venue, a court may dismiss it or, in the interest of justice, transfer it to a district where it could have been brought. The court transferred this action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The Clerk was directed to complete the transfer, the case was closed in the Southern District of New York, and a summons was not to issue from that court. The opinion did not rule on the merits of Madson’s employment claims.
The court left the question whether Madson could proceed without prepaying fees to the transferee court. It certified that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.