Molina v. Wise County Texas
3:17-cv-02225
N.D. Tex.Sep 13, 2017Background
- Plaintiff is a federal prisoner currently incarcerated in Minnesota who filed a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint concerning events that occurred in Wise County, Texas.
- Wise County lies within the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas.
- The magistrate judge considered transfer under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) for convenience of parties and witnesses and in the interest of justice.
- The incidents underlying the complaint occurred in the Fort Worth Division, where relevant records and witnesses are more readily accessible.
- The magistrate judge recommended transferring the case to the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the case should remain in the current forum or be transferred under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) | Plaintiff (unnamed) filed in current court (implied intent to proceed there) | Transfer is appropriate because events, evidence, and witnesses are in Fort Worth Division | Recommended transfer to the Fort Worth Division of the Northern District of Texas |
| Whether the court has discretion to transfer sua sponte | Plaintiff contends case on merits in filed court (implicit) | Court may transfer sua sponte under §§ 1404/1406 and precedent | Court has broad discretion to transfer, may do so sua sponte |
| Which forum is more convenient for witnesses and records | Plaintiff: current forum chosen by plaintiff (implicit) | Fort Worth Division is more convenient for witnesses and records | Fort Worth Division is more convenient and appropriate forum |
| Effect of failing to object to the recommendation | Plaintiff may object to report and recommendation | Defendant relies on procedural rules allowing objections | Parties have 14 days to file specific written objections or waive appellate review |
Key Cases Cited
- Braden v. 30th Judicial Circuit Court of Kentucky, 410 U.S. 484 (recognizing benefits of resolving cases near the site of the controversy)
- Caldwell v. Palmetto State Savings Bank of South Carolina, 811 F.2d 916 (5th Cir. 1987) (district court has broad discretion to transfer venue)
- Mills v. Beech Aircraft Corp., 886 F.2d 758 (5th Cir. 1989) (discussing transfer discretion under § 1404)
- Bell v. Watkins, 692 F.2d 999 (5th Cir. 1982) (forum convenience for witnesses and records supports transfer)
- Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (failure to file specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation waives appellate review)