Gray

Favor VEXATIOUS LITIGANT v. Gray

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaNovember 5, 20191:19-cv-01535California397 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7 8 BRANDON ALEXANDER FAVOR, Case No. 1:19-cv-01535-DAD-EPG 9 Plaintiff, ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE TO THE

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

v.

ETTA MAE GRAY, et al.,

Defendants. 13 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity jurisdiction, be brought only in: (1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same state, (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 the property that is the subject of the action is situated, or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). In this case, there is no indication that any of the defendants reside in the Eastern District of California, and the Complaint states that the claim arose in Men’s…

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.