From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrold v. Smalls

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 1, 2007
No. CIV S-07-2323 MCE JFM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2007)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-2323 MCE JFM P.

November 1, 2007


ORDER


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in "(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same State, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought." 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

In this case, the defendant is located in and the events giving rise to the claims occurred in Riverside County, California which is in the Central District of California. Therefore, plaintiff's claim should have been filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In the interest of justice, a federal court may transfer a complaint filed in the wrong district to the correct district. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a);Starnes v. McGuire, 512 F.2d 918, 932 (D.C. Cir. 1974).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the Central District of California.


Summaries of

Harrold v. Smalls

United States District Court, E.D. California
Nov 1, 2007
No. CIV S-07-2323 MCE JFM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2007)
Case details for

Harrold v. Smalls

Case Details

Full title:S. HARROLD, Plaintiff, v. SMALLS, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Nov 1, 2007

Citations

No. CIV S-07-2323 MCE JFM P (E.D. Cal. Nov. 1, 2007)