Larmon v. Queens Berry Correctional

Background

Daniel Larmon, who is representing himself, filed an action against “Queens Berry Correctional,” Officer White, Sergeant Tomas, and Officer Kelly. He alleges that the defendants violated his rights at “Queens Berry Correctional” in March 2023. The court noted that Larmon refers to the sergeant as both “Tomas” and “Thomas.”

The court could not find a facility by the name “Queens Berry Correctional” in the Southern District of New York or elsewhere in New York. It assumed that Larmon meant Queensboro Correctional Facility, which is in Long Island City, Queens County, within the Eastern District of New York. The opinion says the officers were presumably employed at Queensboro, but Larmon did not state where they reside.

Venue and Transfer

Venue is the legally proper federal district for a case. The court explained that a civil action may generally be filed where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in some circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s authority. Because the officers’ residences were unknown, the court said it was unclear whether venue was proper in the Southern District under the residence-based rule.

The court nevertheless concluded that transfer was appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which permits transfer to another district where the case could have been brought when doing so would be more convenient for the parties and witnesses and serve the interests of justice. The court reasoned that the underlying events appeared to have occurred in Queens and that relevant witnesses and documents would reasonably be expected to be there. It therefore found the Eastern District of New York to be the more convenient forum.

Ruling

The court ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The order states that the transferee court will decide whether Larmon may proceed without prepaying fees. The Southern District court directed that no summons issue from it and stated that the order closes the case there.

The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees. Judge Laura Taylor Swain did not decide whether Larmon’s underlying rights claims were valid.