From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schmidt v. U.S.

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Apr 15, 2004
3:04-CV-729-N (N.D. Tex. Apr. 15, 2004)

Opinion

3:04-CV-729-N.

April 15, 2004


FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and an Order of the Court in implementation thereof, the subject cause has been referred to the United States Magistrate Judge. The findings, conclusions and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, as evidenced by his signature thereto, are as follows:

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS:

Type of Case: This is an action brought by a federal prisoner for relief under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Parties: Plaintiff is presently confined at FMC Fort Worth. Defendants are the United States of America, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), and the Carswell Federal Medical Center (FMC) in Fort Worth, Texas. The Court has neither issued process nor determined whether Plaintiff should be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis in accordance with the provisions of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. Statement of Case: The complaint alleges Defendants were negligent in diagnosing a soft-tissue injury which caused Plaintiff to sustain a severe hip injury which required hip-replacement surgery. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages.

Findings and Conclusions: 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), which governs venue of a federal cause of action, provides in pertinent part as follows:

(b) A civil action wherein jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity of citizenship may, except as otherwise provided by law, 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.

The events giving rise to Plaintiff's cause of action occurred at Carswell FMC in Fort Worth. The City of Fort Worth lies in Tarrant County, which is located within the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division. See 28 U.S.C. § 124(a)(2). Because Plaintiff's claims arise out of events that occurred in Tarrant County, and because Plaintiff is currently confined in Tarrant County, the court has the authority to transfer this case for the convenience of the parties and witnesses, and in the interest of justice, to the Fort Worth Division.

A district court may transfer any civil case "[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, . . . to any other district or division where it might have been brought." 28 U.S.C. § 1404. Under this statute the court may transfer a case upon a motion or sua sponte. Mills v. Beech Aircraft Corp., Inc., 886 F.2d 758, 761 (5th Cir. 1989). "Decisions to effect § 1404 transfers are committed to the sound discretion of the transferring judge. . . ." RECOMMENDATION:

For the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that this action be transferred to the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas.

The Clerk will mail a copy of this recommendation to Plaintiff.


Summaries of

Schmidt v. U.S.

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Apr 15, 2004
3:04-CV-729-N (N.D. Tex. Apr. 15, 2004)
Case details for

Schmidt v. U.S.

Case Details

Full title:LILLY SCHMIDT, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, BUREAU OF PRISONS…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

Date published: Apr 15, 2004

Citations

3:04-CV-729-N (N.D. Tex. Apr. 15, 2004)