Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 30, 2023

Hamilton v. Schenk

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-07491
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Hamilton v. Schenk, Judge Swain transferred Hamilton’s civil-rights action to the Northern District of New York because the alleged events occurred there.

Who this affects

Derrick M. Hamilton and the defendants in his action are affected because the case was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of New York. The transferee court will decide whether Hamilton may proceed without prepaying fees.

What happened

In Hamilton v. Schenk, Derrick M. Hamilton, who is incarcerated and proceeding without a lawyer, alleged that officials violated his rights at Auburn Correctional Facility under several federal laws. The opinion does not decide whether those allegations are true.

The court transferred the action to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York. Auburn Correctional Facility is in that district, and the court determined that the witnesses and documents would likely be there, making that district more convenient.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the transfer, directed that no summons issue from her court, and closed the case there. The Northern District of New York will decide whether Hamilton may continue without paying filing fees, and the court denied fee-free status for any appeal from the transfer order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Hamilton v. Schenk · No. 1:23-cv-07491
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Aug. 30, 2023

Background

Derrick M. Hamilton, who is incarcerated at Attica Correctional Facility and represents himself, brought claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985(3), and 1986, as well as the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. He alleged that the defendants violated his rights at Auburn Correctional Facility.

Venue analysis

Venue rules identify where a civil case may be filed. Hamilton did not provide facts about where the defendants reside, so the court could not determine whether venue was proper in the Southern District of New York based on the defendants’ residences. The court explained, however, that venue was proper in the Northern District of New York because Auburn Correctional Facility, where the alleged events occurred, is located in that district.

The court also applied the rule allowing transfer, even from a district where venue may be proper, when another district would be more convenient for the parties and witnesses and would serve the interests of justice. The court found that the underlying events occurred at Auburn Correctional Facility and that relevant witnesses and documents would reasonably be expected to be there. It also noted that Hamilton does not reside in the Southern District and that the operative events did not occur there.

Disposition

The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York. The Clerk of Court was directed to complete the transfer. The court stated that the transferee court would decide whether Hamilton may proceed without prepaying fees, and it directed that a summons not issue from the Southern District of New York. The order closed the case in that court. The court 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 Hamilton’s underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.