Valerie L. Flores v. Amber Vang

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 14, 20245:24-cv-01347California622 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

DISCUSSION

Under the appropriate venue provision for Plaintiff’s claims, this action must be brought: (1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated; or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to such action. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). Under Section 1391(c), for venue purposes, a “natural person” resides in the judicial district where the person is domiciled, and any other entity “with the capacity to sue and be sued,” if a defendant, resides in any judicial district where it is subject to personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question. § 1391(c)(1), (2). Plaintiff does not plead the residence of any of the individual defendants, alleging only that the institutional defendants reside in either Sacramento County, California,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.