Hume

Hume v. Poskaitis

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 26, 20233:23-cv-03176California398 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EDWARD D. HUME, Case No. 1:23-cv-00944-SKO

Plaintiff,

ORDER TRANSFERRING CASE

v. MARGARET POSKAITIS, et al., 16 Defendants. _____________________________________/

18 On June 23, 2023, Plaintiff Edward D. Hume, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against Defendants Margaret Poskaitis, Christina Moody, and Janet E. Hume, along with an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Docs. 1, 2.) The federal venue statute requires that a civil action, other than one based on diversity jurisdiction, be brought only 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 28 …

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.