Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Tallahassee DIVISION

SAWAND PALMER,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:11cv73-RH/WCS

LEE I. PETERS, JR., et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This case was initiated in this Court on February 22, 2011. Docs. 1, 2. Plaintiff is

pro se in this case, but is a licensed attorney. In reviewing this case, there are several

inconsistencies that should be addressed. Plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma

pauperis, doc. 2, providing a Tallahassee, Florida, address. Doc. 2, p. 2. Plaintiff states

she is not currently employed, does not own any real property, and owes monthly rent

of $700, and receives $275 weekly. Doc. 2. There is no indication as to how or from

where the weekly funds are received by Plaintiff. Id., at 3. Ruling should be deferred on

the in forma pauperis motion. 
Page 2 of 3

Additional problems are evident in the complaint, doc. 1. Plaintiff provides two

address where she can receive mail. One is the Tallahassee address provided in the in

forma pauperis motion and the second is 103 Luke Street in Nashville, Georgia. Doc. 1,

¶ 9. However, in the signature block at the end of the complaint, Plaintiff provides an

address of 103 E. Adair Street, Post Office Box 1933, in Valdosta, Georgia. Submitted

with the complaint was a summons for service on the Defendants, and within that

document Plaintiff provides an address of 104 East Adair Street in Valdosta. One

address must be consistently used for Plaintiff so that mail timely reaches Plaintiff. The

address listed for Plaintiff on this Court's docket is the address Plaintiff provided in the

signature line at the end of the complaint and it is hoped that this report and

recommendation reaches Plaintiff. 

Finally, Plaintiff signed the complaint by providing "Georgia Bar No. 056668." 

That number, however, is Plaintiff's Florida Bar number. 

All of the above problems should be corrected by Plaintiff. At any event, this

case cannot proceed in this Court because the two named Defendants are public

defenders from the Third Judicial Circuit for the State of Florida, and Plaintiff provides

addresses for them in Lake City, Florida. Even though, as a general rule, public

defenders cannot be sued for acts taken in that capacity, Lake City is located within

Columbia County, and the proper venue for this action in the Middle District of Florida,

Jacksonville Division. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); 28 U.S.C. § 89(b). This case should be

transferred there for further proceedings, including review of the in forma pauperis

motion. 

Case No. 4:11cv73-RH/WCS
Page 3 of 3

A federal district court has the authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) to transfer a

case to another district or division "in which it could have been brought." The Court may

also raise the issue of defective venue sua sponte. Lipofsky v. New York State Workers

Comp. Bd., 861 F.2d 1257, 1259 (11th Cir. 1988) (stating "a district court may raise on

its own motion an issue of defective venue or lack of personal jurisdiction; but the court

may not dismiss without first giving the parties an opportunity to present their views on

the issue.") 

In light of the foregoing, and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404(a) and 1406(a), i

respectfully RECOMMEND transfer of this action to the United States District Court for

the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, for all further proceedings.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on February 28, 2011.

 s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 10 days

after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the

scope of review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No. 4:11cv73-RH/WCS