UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

LEON DOUGLAS, #132125,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 2:14-CV-14961

HONORABLE PAUL D. BORMAN

CARMEN PALMER, ET AL.,

Defendants.

_______________________________/

ORDER OF TRANSFER

Before the Court is Plaintiff Leon Douglas’ pro se civil rights complaint brought

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, as well as his application to proceed without prepayment of

costs and fees and a motion to consider his filing as timely. Plaintiff is a state prisoner

currently confined at the Thumb Correctional Facility in Lapeer, Michigan. The events

giving rise to this action occurred while Plaintiff was confined at the Michigan

Reformatory in Ionia, Michigan. Plaintiff alleges that the defendants, Warden Palmer,

Lieutenants Muzzin and Martin, and Resident Unit Manager Gobert – employees at

Michigan Reformatory – improperly confiscated his medically-prescribed shoes and

failed to provide him with proper hearings on the matter. He asserts that the defendants

violated his Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment, were

deliberately indifferent to his medical needs, and violated his rights to due process and

equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment and the Americans with Disabilities

2:14-cv-14961-PDB-PTM Doc # 4 Filed 01/14/15 Pg 1 of 4 Pg ID 55
Act. Plaintiff sues the defendants in their official and individual capacities and seeks

injunctive relief and monetary damages.

Having reviewed the complaint, the Court concludes that venue is improper in this

Court and that the case should be transferred to the United States District Court for the

Western District of Michigan, Southern Division.

Venue for a civil action brought in federal court is governed by 28 U.S.C. § 1391. 

Section 1391(b) provides:

Venue in general. A civil action may be brought in –

(1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all

defendants are residents of the State in which the district is

located;

(2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events

or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial

part of property that is the subject of the action is situated; or

(3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be

brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in

which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal

jurisdiction with respect to such action.

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). Public officials “reside” in the county where they perform their

official duties. O'Neill v. Battisti, 472 F.2d 789, 791 (6th Cir. 1972).

When venue is improper, a district court may either dismiss the case or, in the

interests of justice, transfer the case to a district or division where it could have been

brought. See 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Additionally, even when venue is proper, a district

court may transfer a civil action to any other district where it might have been brought for

2

2:14-cv-14961-PDB-PTM Doc # 4 Filed 01/14/15 Pg 2 of 4 Pg ID 56
the convenience of the parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1404(a). A court may sua sponte transfer a case for improper venue. Carver v. Knox

County, Tenn., 887 F.2d 1287, 1291 (6th Cir. 1989); see also Cosmichrome, Inc. v.

Spectra Chrome, Inc. LLC, 504 F. App’x 468, 472 (6th Cir. 2012); Flynn v. Greg

Anthony Construct. Co., Inc., 95 F. App’x 726, 738 (6th Cir. 2003).

In this case, the defendants reside in Ionia, Michigan and the actions giving rise to

the complaint occurred there. Ionia, Michigan lies in Ionia County, which is located in

the Southern Division of the Western District of Michigan. See 28 U.S.C. § 102(b)(1). 

Venue is therefore proper in the United States District Court for the Western District of

Michigan, Southern Division, not this Court.

Accordingly, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) and in the interests of justice, the

Court orders the Clerk of the Court to transfer this case to the United States District Court

for the Western District of Michigan, Southern Division. The Court makes no

determination as to the merits of the complaint, the application to proceed without

prepayment of fees and costs, or the motion to consider the filing as timely.

s/Paul D. Borman 

PAUL D. BORMAN

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: January 14, 2015

3

2:14-cv-14961-PDB-PTM Doc # 4 Filed 01/14/15 Pg 3 of 4 Pg ID 57
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each

attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on January

14, 2015.

s/Deborah Tofil

Case Manager

4

2:14-cv-14961-PDB-PTM Doc # 4 Filed 01/14/15 Pg 4 of 4 Pg ID 58