Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 13, 2024

Dupree v. Behaviorally

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-03597
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
Civil ProcedureEmploymentPro Se
In one sentence

In Dupree v. Behaviorally, Judge Swain transferred the employment case from New York to the District of New Jersey because venue was improper.

Who this affects

Danielle DuPree and Behaviorally Inc.; the case will proceed, if at all, in the District of New Jersey rather than the Southern District of New York.

What happened

In Dupree v. Behaviorally, Danielle DuPree, representing herself, sued Behaviorally Inc. under Title VII, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and state law, alleging employment discrimination and retaliation based on race, color, and sex.

The court said venue was not proper in New York because the complaint did not show that the alleged unlawful practices occurred there or that Behaviorally was a New York resident. It concluded that the claims arose in New Jersey, where the case could have been filed.

Judge Swain transferred the action to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey under the federal venue statute. The New York court closed the case, directed that no summons issue there, and denied fee-free status for any appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dupree v. Behaviorally · No. 1:24-cv-03597
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 13, 2024

Background

Danielle DuPree filed this action without a lawyer. She alleged employment discrimination and retaliation under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, based on race, color, and sex. She also asserted claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and state law. She sued Behaviorally Inc., which the opinion states is located in Teaneck, New Jersey. The opinion notes that DuPree’s complaint mistakenly listed the location as “Teaneck, NY.”

Venue analysis

The court explained that Title VII claims may be filed where the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred, where relevant employment records are maintained, where the person would have worked absent the alleged violation, or, in certain circumstances, where the employer’s principal office is located. The court also described the general venue rules for the Fair Labor Standards Act and state-law claims.

DuPree resides in Queens, New York. The court found that nothing in the complaint suggested that the alleged employment practices occurred in New York or that Behaviorally was a resident of New York for venue purposes. It therefore concluded that venue was not proper in the Southern District of New York under either the Title VII venue provision or the general federal venue statute.

Disposition

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), when a case is filed in the wrong venue, a court may transfer it to a district where it could have been brought if transfer serves the interests of justice. The court found that DuPree’s claims arose in New Jersey and that the District of New Jersey was the proper federal district. It therefore transferred the action to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.

The Clerk was directed to transfer the action. The opinion states that the transferee court would decide whether DuPree could continue without paying filing fees. The Southern District of New York ordered that no summons issue from that court and stated that the order closed the case. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal.

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.