Gurkim Hundal v. Sevana Petrosian

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaAugust 6, 20242:24-cv-07165California510 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

DISCUSSION

Under the general venue provision, a civil action may be brought in (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). For purposes of venue, a “natural person” resides in the district where the person is domiciled, and an “entity with the capacity to sue and be sued” resides in any judicial district where it is subject to personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(1), (2). Plaintiff brings this suit against Defendants SEV Aesthetics, Inc., its owner, Sevana Petrosian, and an employee at the West Hollywood site, Kayla Crichlow. Plaintiff alleges that all Defendants are citizens of California for purposes…

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.