Case Name: Robert ZORN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael MCWHORTER, Deputy, the Hartford Insurance Company, State of New York, Washington County Sheriffs Department, Defendants-Appellees, State of New York, Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-12-28
Citations: 115 F. App'x 520
Docket Number: No. 04-0774
Parties: Robert ZORN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael MCWHORTER, Deputy, the Hartford Insurance Company, State of New York, Washington County Sheriffs Department, Defendants-Appellees, State of New York, Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 115
Pages: 520–521

Head Matter:
Robert ZORN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Michael MCWHORTER, Deputy, the Hartford Insurance Company, State of New York, Washington County Sheriffs Department, Defendants-Appellees, State of New York, Defendant.
No. 04-0774.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Dec. 28, 2004.
Robert Zorn, Middletown Springs, VT, for Plaintiff-Appellant, pro se.
Gregg T. Johnson, Girvin & Ferlazzo P.C., Albany, N.Y (on submission), for Defendants-Appellees Michael McWhorter and Washington County Sheriffs Department.
No appearance, for Defendant-Appellee Hartford Insurance Company.
PRESENT: MESKILL, CALABRESI, and WESLEY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
SUMMARY ORDER
Plaintiff-Appellant Robert Zorn ("Zorn"), proceeding pro se, filed the instant action in the District of Vermont pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that actions by the Defendants-Appellees Michael McWhorter, the Hartford Insurance Company, and the Washington County Sheriffs Department ("Defendants") in connection with a traffic accident that occurred in New York State violated Zorn's rights to equal protection and due process. The district court determined that venue was improper in the District of Vermont, and dismissed the action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(b).
We affirm the dismissal of this case for improper venue, with respect to all of the defendants, based substantially on the reasoning of the court below. We have considered all of Zorn's contentions on appeal and find them to be without merit. Accordingly, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
. The State of New York, named by Zorn as a defendant, was never served with a complaint and has not appeared in the action.
. We note that the request made by Defendants to strike portions of Zorn's appendix on appeal was not made in the form of a motion to this court, and in any case is denied as moot.