Lee v. The Board of Education of the City of New York and/or the Department of…
Lee v. The Board of Education of the City of New York and/or the Department of Education of the City of New York
- Rochon
- 1:24-cv-00545
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
Judge Rochon transferred Lee v. Board of Education to the Eastern District of New York because the plaintiff and alleged events were there.
Clare Lee and the defendants are affected because the case was transferred from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York; the opinion did not resolve the underlying claims.
What happened
In Lee v. The Board of Education of the City of New York and/or the Department of Education of the City of New York, Clare Lee brought discrimination and retaliation claims under federal, state, and local law. She told the court that the case had been filed there by mistake and asked to move it to the Eastern District of New York.
The court applied the rule allowing a case to be transferred for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interests of justice. It found that Lee resides in the Eastern District, the alleged sexual harassment and retaliation occurred there at the school where Lee and an assistant principal worked, and relevant documents, witnesses, and evidence were likely located there.
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted Lee’s transfer motion and directed the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The opinion did not decide the discrimination or retaliation claims.
The detailed version
- Lee v. The Board of Education of the City of New York and/or the Department of… · No. 1:24-cv-00545
- Rochon
- Jan. 26, 2024
Background
Clare Lee sued the Board of Education of the City of New York and/or the Department of Education of the City of New York, along with other defendants, asserting discrimination and retaliation claims under federal, state, and local law. The day after filing the complaint in the Southern District of New York, Lee informed the court that the case had been filed there by mistake and moved to transfer it to the Eastern District of New York.
Transfer Standard
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a district court may transfer a case to another district where it could have been brought when the transfer would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice. Courts may consider factors including the plaintiff’s choice of forum, witness convenience, the location of documents and other evidence, the parties’ convenience, where the important events occurred, the ability to require unwilling witnesses to attend, and the parties’ relative resources.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that the factors favored transfer. Lee resides in the Eastern District of New York, which reduced the weight given to her original choice of the Southern District. Her choice of the Southern District was also given little weight because she said the complaint had been filed there erroneously and asked for the Eastern District instead. The court further found that the operative facts were centered in the Eastern District because the case concerned alleged sexual harassment and retaliation by an assistant principal at the school where the assistant principal and Lee worked. The court concluded that relevant documents, witnesses, and methods of obtaining evidence were likely located there.
Disposition
Judge Jennifer L. Rochon granted Lee’s motion to transfer and directed the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The opinion addressed venue and convenience; it did not decide the underlying discrimination or retaliation claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.