Cohen v. MacKay

S.D. New York

Cohen v. MacKay

DecidedJanuary 27, 2025

Docket1:25-cv-00226

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Cohen v. MacKay, (S.D.N.Y. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MARTIN L. COHEN, Plaintiff, -against- 25-CV-226 (AS) FRANK MACKAY, ORDER Defendant.

ARUN SUBRAMANIAN, United States District Judge: On January 3, 2025, Martin Cohen filed suit against Frank MacKay, alleging violations of the federal constitution and the New York Trust Act. Dkt. 1 at 9. On January 13, 2025, the Court ordered Cohen to file a letter explaining why venue is proper in this district, given that both parties are domiciled in the Eastern District and the events giving rise to Cohen’s complaint occurred in the Eastern District. Dkt. 4. Cohen filed no such letter. If an action is filed in the wrong district court, a court “shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). A court may do so sua sponte. See Reed v. Pfizer, Inc., 2022 WL 16857316, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2022). Here, the Court finds that transfer to the Eastern District of New York is in the interest of Justice. There is no indication in the complaint that Cohen sued in the Southern District of New York to forum shop, nor would transferring unduly prejudice the defendant. See Gibbon v. Fronton, 661 F. Supp. 2d 429, 436 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). Accordingly, the court sua sponte transfers this action to the Eastern District of New York.

SO ORDERED. Dated: January 27, 2025 New York, New York

ARUN SUBRAMANIAN United States District Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MARTIN L. COHEN, Plaintiff, -against- 25-CV-226 (AS) FRANK MACKAY, ORDER Defendant.

ARUN SUBRAMANIAN, United States District Judge: On January 3, 2025, Martin Cohen filed suit against Frank MacKay, alleging violations of the federal constitution and the New York Trust Act. Dkt. 1 at 9. On January 13, 2025, the Court ordered Cohen to file a letter explaining why venue is proper in this district, given that both parties are domiciled in the Eastern District and the events giving rise to Cohen’s complaint occurred in the Eastern District. Dkt. 4. Cohen filed no such letter. If an action is filed in the wrong district court, a court “shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). A court may do so sua sponte. See Reed v. Pfizer, Inc., 2022 WL 16857316, at *2 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2022). Here, the Court finds that transfer to the Eastern District of New York is in the interest of Justice. There is no indication in the complaint that Cohen sued in the Southern District of New York to forum shop, nor would transferring unduly prejudice the defendant. See Gibbon v. Fronton, 661 F. Supp. 2d 429, 436 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). Accordingly, the court sua sponte transfers this action to the Eastern District of New York.

SO ORDERED. Dated: January 27, 2025 New York, New York

ARUN SUBRAMANIAN United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Cohen v. MacKay, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-v-mackay-nysd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack