Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-CV-855-MHT (WO)
11-18-2015
JOHN D. TOWNSEND, #255117, Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH HEADLEY, et al., Defendants.
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I. INTRODUCTION
This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action is before the court on a complaint filed by John D. Townsend ("Townsend"), a state inmate, in which he challenges the constitutionality of actions taken against him by correctional officials at the Childersburg Community Based Facility. Specifically, Townsend maintains that during his confinement at such facility the defendants improperly destroyed his legal, religious and personal mail, discriminated against him due to his religion and transferred him from the community based facility in retaliation for "speaking against this erroneous situation that occurred because [he is] Muslim/Moorish America." Complaint - Doc. No. 1 at 2-3.
Upon review of the factual allegations presented in the complaint, it is clear to the court that this case should be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404.
The plaintiff filed an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Doc. No. 2. However, under the circumstances of this case, the court concludes that assessment and collection of any filing fee should be undertaken by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. --------
II. DISCUSSION
A 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil action "may be brought ... 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 (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). The law further provides that "[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, [and] in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district ... where it might have been brought." 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a).
The Childersburg Community Based Facility is located within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. Consequently, the actions about which the plaintiff complains occurred in the jurisdiction of that court. It likewise appears that the individuals named as defendants reside in the Northern District of Alabama. Under these circumstances, the claims asserted by the plaintiff are beyond the venue of this court. However, it is clear from the face of the complaint that the proper venue for this cause of action is the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
In light of the foregoing, the court concludes that in the interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties this case should be transferred to the United States District Court for the Norhern District of Alabama for review and determination.
III. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1404. It is further
ORDERED that on or before December 2, 2015 the parties may file objections to the Recommendation. A party must specifically identify the factual findings and legal conclusions in the Recommendation to which objection is made; frivolous, conclusive, or general objections will not be considered. Failure to file written objections to the Magistrate Judge's findings and recommendations in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) shall bar a party from a de novo determination by the District Court of legal and factual issues covered in the Recommendation and waives the right of the party to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982); 11TH CIR. R. 3-1. See Stein v. Lanning Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc).
Done this 18th day of November, 2015.
/s/Terry F. Moorer
TERRY F. MOORER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE