Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 11, 2024

Allen v. Civil Rights Cordinator

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:23-cv-10804
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Social SecurityCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

Allen v. Civil Rights Coordinator: Judge Swain transferred Allen’s Social Security case to the Eastern District of New York because he resides in Brooklyn.

Who this affects

Walter Louis Allen and the defendants named in the action; the case will proceed, if at all, in the Eastern District of New York rather than the Southern District of New York.

What happened

In Allen v. Civil Rights Coordinator, Walter Louis Allen brought a case without a lawyer concerning Social Security benefits. The court said his claims were not clearly stated but understood them as seeking review of a Social Security benefits decision.

Judge Swain explained that Social Security review must be brought in the federal district where the claimant resides. Because Allen alleged that he lives in Brooklyn, which is in Kings County and the Eastern District of New York, venue was improper in the Southern District of New York.

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the Clerk to transfer the case to the Eastern District of New York under the federal venue statute. The Southern District case was closed, no summons would issue there, and the court denied fee-free status for any appeal, finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The order did not decide whether Allen is entitled to benefits.

The detailed version

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

Case
Allen v. Civil Rights Cordinator · No. 1:23-cv-10804
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
Jan. 11, 2024

Background

Walter Louis Allen, who alleged that he resides in Brooklyn, filed this action without a lawyer and invoked federal-question jurisdiction. He named Civil Rights Coordinator, Office of the General Counsel Region #2, and Church St. Station Social Security Administration as defendants. The court stated that Allen’s claims were not clearly stated, but understood them as claims concerning Social Security benefits.

Legal framework

The court explained that 42 U.S.C. §§ 405(g) and 1383(c)(3) provide the exclusive method for judicial review of the relevant Social Security benefits decision. Under those provisions, an action may be brought in the federal district where the plaintiff resides or has a principal place of business, or, if neither is within a federal judicial district, in the District of Columbia.

Venue ruling

Allen alleged that he resides in Brooklyn, which is in Kings County. The court stated that Kings County is within the Eastern District of New York. Because Allen resides outside the Southern District of New York, venue was not proper there, while venue was proper in the Eastern District. The court therefore directed the Clerk to transfer the action under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).

Disposition

The court ordered transfer of the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York and closed the case in the Southern District of New York. It stated that the transferee court would decide whether Allen could proceed without prepaying fees. No summons would issue from the Southern District. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order did not decide the merits of Allen’s Social Security benefits 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.