HOPPER v. AMERICAN CORADIUS INTERNATIONAL LLC
1:24-cv-01014
M.D.N.C.Jul 8, 2025Background:
- Brandace Hopper (Plaintiff), pro se, filed a complaint in North Carolina state court (Mecklenburg County) against American Coradius International LLC (Defendant), alleging improper debt collection practices under state and federal law.
- Defendant removed the case to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, asserting venue was proper there because the state court was within its jurisdiction.
- Plaintiff filed two motions: one to sever and remand state claims, and another to strike unsupported defenses or require a more definite statement.
- Plaintiff resides in Mecklenburg County, and all alleged acts or omissions occurred there.
- Defendant is a New York-based LLC with no alleged residency or business presence in the Middle District of North Carolina.
- The Magistrate Judge reviewed the propriety of venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 and sua sponte considered whether to transfer the case.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether venue is proper in the Middle | Venue proper where Plaintiff resides & events occurred; that's | Venue is proper because the Middle District "embraces" | Venue in the Middle District is improper; transfer to |
| District of North Carolina | Mecklenburg County | Mecklenburg County as removal court | Western District is mandated |
| Whether transfer is appropriate under | N/A (did not contest transfer; focused on merits and motions) | Did not contest, but removal notice misconstrued district | Transfer required in the interest of justice |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a) | |||
| How to handle pending plaintiff's | Address motions now | Address motions now or after transfer | Defer motions to transferee court in the Western District |
| motions (sever/remand; strike/definite) |
Key Cases Cited
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (2007) (pro se complaints must be liberally construed)
- White v. Raymark Indus., Inc., 783 F.2d 1175 (4th Cir. 1986) (district courts have inherent power to manage their proceedings)
- Beaudett v. City of Hampton, 775 F.2d 1274 (4th Cir. 1985) (limits of liberal construction for pro se pleadings)
- Philips v. Pitt Cty. Mem'l. Hosp., 572 F.3d 176 (4th Cir. 2009) (judicial notice of public records permitted)
- Goldlawr v. Heiman, 369 U.S. 463 (1962) (interest of justice favors transfer over dismissal when venue is improper)