Brown v. Martino

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan
DecidedMay 12, 2025
Docket1:25-cv-00556
StatusUnknown

This text of Brown v. Martino (Brown v. Martino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brown v. Martino, (W.D. Mich. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ROBERT TAYLOR BROWN,

Plaintiff, Case No. 24-13092 Honorable Laurie J. Michelson v.

MARTINO et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN Robert Taylor Brown, who is currently confined at the Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility in Ionia, Michigan, filed this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging constitutional violations by multiple Michigan Department of Corrections employees. (ECF No. 1.) In an opinion and order entered today (ECF No. 8), the Court dismissed all claims against Defendants Martino, Hadden, Buchin, Chevette, Arrendondo, Breedlove, and Porter and dismissed Brown’s official-capacity claims against all defendants. The 16 defendants who remain are all residents of Ionia County for venue purposes, see O’Neill v. Battisti, 472 F.2d 789, 791 (6th Cir. 1972) (per curiam), and the events giving rise to Brown’s complaint occurred in Ionia County at the Bellamy Creek Correctional Facility, where Brown is currently incarcerated. Thus, under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), venue is proper in the Western District of Michigan, and transfer to the Western District is in the interest of justice under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). See Miles v. WTMX Radio, 15 F. App’x 213, 215 (6th Cir. 2001); Cosmichrome, Inc. v. Spectra Chrome, LLC, 504 F. App’x 468, 472 (6th Cir. 2012) (noting that “a district court has the power to sua sponte transfer [the] case” under § 1406(a)). Transfer is likewise in

the interest of justice under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and appropriate for the convenience of the parties and witnesses. See Overland, Inc. v. Taylor, 79 F. Supp. 2d 809, 811 (E.D. Mich. 2000); Carver v. Knox County, 887 F.2d 1287, 1291 (6th Cir. 1989) (noting that “a district court may transfer a case sua sponte” under § 1404(a)). Accordingly, the Court orders the Clerk of Court to transfer this case to the

United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan. The Court makes no determination as to the merits of Brown’s claims against the remaining defendants. SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 12, 2025

s/Laurie J. Michelson LAURIE J. MICHELSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Overland, Inc. v. Taylor
79 F. Supp. 2d 809 (E.D. Michigan, 2000)
Cosmichrome, Inc. v. Spectra Chrome, LLC
504 F. App'x 468 (Sixth Circuit, 2012)
O'Neill v. Battisti
472 F.2d 789 (Sixth Circuit, 1972)
Miles v. Radio
15 F. App'x 213 (Sixth Circuit, 2001)
Carver v. Knox County
887 F.2d 1287 (Sixth Circuit, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Brown v. Martino, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-martino-miwd-2025.