Mitchell v. Lamarca

District Court, E.D. Michigan·Decided February 8, 2023·No. 2:23-cv-10325·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION ______

ORLANDO DEMETRIUS MITCHELL,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:23-cv-14

v. Honorable Paul L. Maloney

FRANK LAMARCA et al.,

Defendants. ____________________________/ ORDER OF TRANSFER This is a civil rights action brought by a state prisoner under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff presently is incarcerated at the Kinross Correctional Facility (KCF) in Kincheloe, Chippewa County, Michigan, though the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s action occurred at the St. Louis Correctional Facility (SLF) in St. Louis, Gratiot County, Michigan, as well as the Henry Ford Allegiance Hospital in Jackson, Michigan. Plaintiff sues Dr. Frank Lamarca, the Henry Ford Allegiance Hospital itself, and the medical staff at SLF. In his pro se complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants did not provide adequate medical care for a lump that Plaintiff discovered on his lower back. Under the revised venue statute, venue in federal-question cases lies in the district in which any defendant resides or in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). The events underlying the complaint occurred in Jackson and Gratiot Counties. Defendants are individuals serving in Jackson and Gratiot Counties, and they “reside” in those counties for purposes of venue over a suit challenging official acts. See Butterworth v. Hill, 114 U.S. 128, 132 (1885); O’Neill v. Battisti, 472 F.2d 789, 791 (6th Cir. 1972). Jackson and Gratiot Counties are within the geographical boundaries of the Eastern District of Michigan. 28 U.S.C. § 102(a). In these circumstances, venue is proper only in the Eastern District. Therefore: IT IS ORDERED that this case be transferred to the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Michigan pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). It is noted that this Court has not decided Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, nor has the Court reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2), 1915A, or under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(c).

Dated: February 6, 2023 /s/ Paul L. Maloney Paul L. Maloney United States District Judge

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

Mitchell v. Lamarca, (E.D. Mich. 2023).

Mitchell v. Lamarca (Mitchell v. Lamarca) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Butterworth v. Hill
114 U.S. 128 (Supreme Court, 1885)
O'Neill v. Battisti
472 F.2d 789 (Sixth Circuit, 1972)