Channin-Albanese v. J&P Ontime Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, E.D. New York
DecidedAugust 19, 2024
Docket1:24-cv-06076
StatusUnknown

This text of Channin-Albanese v. J&P Ontime Inc. (Channin-Albanese v. J&P Ontime Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Channin-Albanese v. J&P Ontime Inc., (E.D.N.Y. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JILL CHANNIN-ALBANESE, Plaintiff(s), Case No. 1:24-cv-05775 (JLR) -against- ORDER J&P ONTIME INC. and FRANK CONCEPTION- BENCOS, Defendants. JENNIFER L. ROCHON, United States District Judge: “For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district . . . where it might have been brought or to any district . . . to which all parties have consented.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). “District courts have broad discretion in making determinations of convenience under Section 1404(a).” Corley v. United States, 11 F.4th 79, 89 (2d Cir. 2021) (quoting D.H. Blair & Co. v. Gottdiener, 462 F.3d 95, 106 (2d Cir. 2006)). Transfer may also be sua sponte. See id. at 83, 90 (affirming sua sponte transfer); Bank of Am., N.A. v. Wilmington Tr. FSB, 943 F. Supp. 2d 417, 426 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) (“The power of district courts to transfer cases under Section 1404(a) sua sponte . . . is well established.” (citation omitted)). Although this action “was properly removed to the Southern District of New York pursuant to [28 U.S.C.] § 1441(a) because it was removed from a state court in the district,” Speedfit LLC v. Woodway USA, Inc., 642 F. Supp. 3d 429, 442 (S.D.N.Y. 2022), it could have initially been brought in the Eastern District of New York: the parties are diverse, and plaintiff’s alleged injuries arise from an accident that occurred in that district, Dkt. 1-1 ¶¶ 1-3, 13; see 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). The parties have also indicated that they consent to, or at least do not oppose, transfer of this case to the Eastern District of New York. Dkts. 10, 12. Therefore, the Court finds that the Eastern District of New York is the appropriate venue for this particular action. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to transfer this action to the Eastern District of New York.

Dated: August 19, 2024 New York, New York SO ORDERED. Ants L. ROCHON nited States District Judge

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

Related

Corley v. United States
11 F.4th 79 (Second Circuit, 2021)
D.H. Blair & Co. v. Gottdiener
462 F.3d 95 (Second Circuit, 2006)
Bank of America, N.A. v. Wilmington Trust FSB
943 F. Supp. 2d 417 (S.D. New York, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Channin-Albanese v. J&P Ontime Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/channin-albanese-v-jp-ontime-inc-nyed-2024.