6:18-cv-00842
N.D. Ala.May 8, 2018Background
- Plaintiff Ricky Dewayne Booth, a state inmate, filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint challenging actions that occurred April 6–10, 2018 while he was incarcerated at Bibb Correctional Facility.
- Bibb Correctional Facility is located in the Northern District of Alabama; Booth is now housed at Hamilton Aged and Infirmed Correctional Facility.
- Defendants include Bibb correctional and mental-health officials (who reside in the Northern District) and statewide officials (Governor Kay Ivey, Commissioner Jefferson Dunn, Deputy Commissioner J. Watson) who reside in the Middle District but are amenable to service statewide.
- Booth did not seek in forma pauperis status nor pay the filing and administrative fees; the magistrate judge deferred fee assessment to the transferee court.
- The magistrate judge considered venue and convenience under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and 1404(a) and concluded transfer was appropriate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proper venue / transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) | Claims arise from events at Bibb; filed in Middle District (Booth initiated action there) | Majority of events and most individual defendants are in Northern District; statewide officials defend statewide suits but actions occurred in Northern District | Case should be transferred to the Northern District of Alabama for convenience and in the interest of justice |
| Service and residency of statewide officials | Not addressed as a basis to oppose transfer | Governor and ADOC officials reside in Middle District but are subject to statewide service and often defend in all Alabama federal courts | Residency of some defendants in Middle District does not defeat transfer where locus of events and most defendants are in Northern District |
| Assessment/collection of filing fees | Did not request IFP or pay fees | Defendants implicitly rely on transferee court to handle administrative matters | Magistrate deferred assessment/collection of filing/administrative fees to the Northern District court |
| Objections and appellate preservation | Plaintiff may object to recommendation | Defendants would rely on procedural rules | Plaintiff was given deadline and warned that failure to object waives de novo review and appellate challenges except for plain error |
Key Cases Cited
- Resolution Trust Co. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144 (11th Cir. 1993) (failure to object to magistrate judge recommendations can waive de novo review and appellate challenge)
- Henley v. Johnson, 885 F.2d 790 (11th Cir. 1989) (standards regarding objections to magistrate judge recommendations and preservation of issues for appeal)