Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled May 16, 2024

Graham v. New York City Department of Education

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:24-cv-03149
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
4
Civil RightsSection 1983Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Graham v. New York City Department of Education, Chief Judge Swain transferred Graham’s case to the Eastern District of New York.

Who this affects

Kenton Graham and the New York City Department of Education and Vernon Johnson. The case was moved from the Southern District of New York to the Eastern District of New York, which will decide any further proceedings.

What happened

Kenton Graham, representing himself, sued the New York City Department of Education and Vernon Johnson under a federal civil-rights law. He alleged that they violated his right to fair procedures by ending his employment without following New York Education Law procedures.

The court found that the alleged events largely occurred in Brooklyn, where Graham worked, and that Graham lives in Staten Island. Both locations are in the Eastern District of New York. The court also noted that Graham has a related employment-discrimination case against the same defendants pending there.

The court ordered the case transferred to the Eastern District of New York under the federal transfer statute, and Judge Laura Taylor Swain closed the case in the Southern District of New York. The court did not decide whether Graham’s claims were legally valid. It also denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Graham v. New York City Department of Education · No. 1:24-cv-03149
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
May 16, 2024

Background

Kenton Graham filed this pro se action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal law allowing claims against persons who violate constitutional rights under color of state law. Graham alleged that the defendants deprived him of due process by terminating his employment without following the procedures required by New York State Education Law § 3020. The second amended complaint named the New York City Department of Education and Vernon Johnson, identified as the principal of Brooklyn School for Law and Technology.

The claims arose from the termination of Graham’s employment as a probationary math teacher at that school, which is located in Brooklyn, Kings County. Graham resides in Staten Island, Richmond County. The court noted that both Brooklyn and Staten Island are in the Eastern District of New York.

Venue and Transfer

Venue means the federal district where a case may properly be heard. The court explained that a civil-rights action may generally be brought where a defendant resides, where a substantial part of the events occurred, or, in limited circumstances, where a defendant is subject to the court’s authority. The court stated that the Department of Education resides in both the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York for this purpose, but Graham did not allege where Johnson resides. The court therefore found it unclear whether venue was proper in the Southern District under the defendant-residence provision.

The court concluded that the Eastern District was a proper venue because the alleged events appeared to have occurred largely in Brooklyn. It also applied 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), which permits transfer to another federal district for the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. The court considered the locations of Graham’s residence and the underlying events, as well as the fact that Graham had a related employment-discrimination action against the same defendants pending in the Eastern District. It determined that the Eastern District appeared to be the more convenient forum.

Ruling

Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered the Clerk of Court to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The order did not decide the merits of Graham’s due-process claims. The court stated that the transferee court would decide whether Graham could proceed without prepaying filing fees, directed that summonses not issue from the Southern District, and closed the action in that court. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without prepaying fees.

The authoritative version

Read the full 4-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.