Morrison v. University of Texas
- Laura Swain
- 1:24-cv-03467
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Morrison v. University of Texas, Judge Swain transferred Morrison’s action to the Northern District of Texas because Texas appeared more convenient.
Susan D. Morrison’s action was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Northern District of Texas; the transferee court will decide whether she may proceed without prepaying fees.
What happened
In Morrison v. University of Texas, Susan D. Morrison, representing herself, sued the University of Texas, the State of Texas, Thomas Spencer, and Apple. She alleged that she was unjustly terminated and described other events involving Texas, Louisiana, New York, Costa Rica, and elsewhere.
The Southern District of New York found that venue did not appear proper there based on the defendants’ residences or the court’s authority over them. Although Morrison seemed to allege that some events occurred in New York, she did not explain what those events were or where they happened. The court also determined that Texas appeared more convenient because Morrison did not live in the district, the events discussed occurred in Texas, and relevant witnesses and documents could be there.
Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the action transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. The New York court closed the action there, directed that summonses not issue from that court, and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.
The detailed version
- Morrison v. University of Texas · No. 1:24-cv-03467
- Laura Swain
- May 9, 2024
Background
Susan D. Morrison, proceeding without a lawyer, filed this federal-question action against the University of Texas, the State of Texas, Thomas Spencer, and Apple. Morrison alleged that she was “unjustly terminated” from her job. She also alleged that her former employer, which she did not identify, blackballed her in Texas, harassed her in her neighborhood, prevented her from practicing her religion, and caused her house to go into foreclosure. She identified the underlying event as occurring in “the State of Tx, State of La., New York, Costa Rica, etc.”
Venue analysis
The court explained that federal venue may be proper 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 personal jurisdiction. Morrison alleged that Spencer resides in Dallas, Texas, which is in the Northern District of Texas. She did not provide addresses for the University of Texas, the State of Texas, or Apple.
The court stated that venue did not appear proper in the Southern District of New York based on defendants’ residences or personal jurisdiction. Although Morrison seemed to allege that some events occurred in New York, she did not explain what those events were or where in New York they occurred.
Transfer ruling
Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), a court may transfer an action, even when venue is proper, to another district where the case could have been brought when the transfer would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the interests of justice. The court concluded that transfer was appropriate. Morrison did not reside in the Southern District of New York; the events discussed in the complaint occurred in Texas; most defendants appeared to reside there; and relevant documents and witnesses could reasonably be located there.
Disposition
The court transferred the action to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas and closed the action in the Southern District of New York. It directed that summonses would not issue from the New York court. The transferee court was left to decide whether Morrison could proceed without prepaying fees. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without prepaying fees for purposes of an appeal.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.