Suarez v. Whole Foods Market IP Inc.
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-07723
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Suarez v. Whole Foods Market IP Inc., Judge Swain transferred the pro se case to Florida because venue was improper in New York.
Joel A. Horta Suarez and the defendants named in the action were affected by the transfer from the Southern District of New York to the Southern District of Florida. The Florida court will determine whether Suarez may proceed without prepaying fees.
What happened
In Suarez v. Whole Foods Market IP Inc., Joel A. Horta Suarez, representing himself, sued Whole Foods Market IP Inc. and four employees over events he said occurred in Miami, Florida. He filed the case in the Southern District of New York.
The court concluded that the complaint showed no connection between the claims or defendants and New York. Because the events occurred in Miami-Dade County, the court found that the Southern District of Florida was the proper venue. Suarez’s preference for a court that allowed people without lawyers to file documents by email did not establish proper venue.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain transferred the case to the Southern District of Florida in the interest of justice under the federal venue statute. The New York court closed the case there, terminated the other motions, and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The transferee court will decide whether Suarez may proceed without prepaying filing fees.
The detailed version
- Suarez v. Whole Foods Market IP Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-07723
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 1, 2023
Background
Joel A. Horta Suarez, who the opinion says is a resident of Miami, Florida, filed this self-represented action against Whole Foods Market IP Inc., a Whole Foods Market located in downtown Miami, and four employees of that store. He alleged that the defendants violated his rights in Miami, Florida. The opinion also states that he filed a motion asking for a transfer to cure what he called a lack of jurisdiction, while arguing that the case should be allowed to proceed in New York because that court permitted self-represented litigants to file documents by email.
Venue Analysis
Federal law generally permits a civil case to be filed 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 found that the complaint alleged that the events occurred in Miami-Dade County and that the individual defendants worked at the downtown Miami Whole Foods. Suarez did not allege the individual defendants’ residences, and he alleged no facts connecting the claims or defendants to the Southern District of New York. The court therefore held that venue was not proper in New York and that the Southern District of Florida was a proper venue because the claims arose there.
Disposition
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406, a court may transfer a case filed in the wrong venue when transfer serves the interest of justice. The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It directed the clerk to make the transfer, stated that a summons would not issue from the New York court, closed the case in that court, and terminated all other motions. The court left the question of whether Suarez could proceed without prepaying fees to the transferee court. It also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. The order addressed venue and case administration; it did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.