Shih v. Greater Newark Economic Corp
- Laura Swain
- 1:23-cv-08220
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Shih v. Greater Newark Economic Corp., Judge Swain transferred Shih’s case from New York to New Jersey for convenience.
Pim Shih’s case will proceed, if at all, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey rather than the Southern District of New York. GNEC is also affected because the forum changes. The District of New Jersey will decide whether to grant Shih permission to proceed without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Shih v. Greater Newark Economic Corp., Pim Shih, representing themself, sued the Greater Newark Economic Corporation over alleged discrimination, lending, retaliation, consumer-protection, and other claims. Shih sought damages, an order requiring action, legal fees, and a public apology.
The court said New Jersey was a proper place for the case because the defendant appeared to reside there, and because both Shih and the defendant were located in that federal district. The court also said the relevant documents and witnesses would likely be there, making New Jersey more convenient.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the case transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. She left the decision on Shih’s request to proceed without paying filing fees to that court, closed the case in New York, and denied that status for any appeal.
The detailed version
- Shih v. Greater Newark Economic Corp · No. 1:23-cv-08220
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 4, 2023
Background
Pim Shih filed this action without a lawyer against Greater Newark Economic Corp. (GNEC). Shih sought damages, injunctive relief, legal fees, and a public apology. The complaint asserted claims described as discrimination, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, tortious interference with business relations, retaliation, violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, First Amendment violations, fair-lending violations, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, state fair-lending violations, and consumer-protection violations.
Venue analysis
Venue means the federal district where a case may properly be heard. The court explained that federal law permits a civil action to be filed where the defendant resides or where a substantial part of the relevant events occurred. Shih appeared to allege that GNEC resided in Newark, New Jersey. Because New Jersey is one federal judicial district, the District of New Jersey was a proper venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1).
The court said the Southern District of New York might also be a proper venue based on Shih’s allegations about the parties’ locations and where the events occurred. But it found those allegations conclusory and lacking factual detail. Even assuming New York was a proper venue, the court held that transfer was appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which allows transfer to another proper federal district for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice.
Ruling
The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. It relied on the fact that Shih and GNEC were located in that district and that relevant documents and witnesses could reasonably be expected to be there. The court directed the Clerk to transfer the action and closed the action in the Southern District of New York.
The court deferred to the District of New Jersey on whether to grant Shih permission to proceed without paying filing fees. It certified that any appeal from the transfer order would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying fees for purposes of an appeal. Judge Laura Taylor Swain signed the order.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.