Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Roberson v. Ouachita Correctional Center

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana

September 12, 2019

VINCENT D. ROBERSON
v.
OUACHITA CORRECTIONAL CENTER, DR. PARKER

         SECTION “E” (4)

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          KAREN WELLS ROBY CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         The pro se plaintiff, Vincent D. Roberson (“Roberson”), is incarcerated in the Ouachita Correctional Center (“OCC”) in Monroe, Louisiana. The plaintiff filed this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the defendants, Ouachita Correctional Center and the prison physician, Dr. Parker.[1] The plaintiff alleges that the doctor prescribed too much medication causing him to have a stroke, and the officials refuse to correct his medication. With his complaint, Roberson submitted a pauper application that did not include the required prisoner account certification.[2] When Robison failed to correct the deficiency, the Court denied him leave to proceed as a pauper.[3]

         On August 29, 2019, Roberson submitted a pleading which has been construed as a Motion to Reconsider Pauper Status.[4] For the following reasons, that motion should be deferred, and the matter transferred to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.

         I. Venue Provisions

         Because § 1983 contains no specific venue provision, venue is determined under the general venue provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1391. See Jones v. Bales, 58 F.R.D. 453 (N.D.Ga. 1972), aff'd, 480 F.2d 805 (5th Cir. 1973). The general venue statute at 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) provides as follows:

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.

         The provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1406 allow a court to transfer a case from a district in which venue is wrong to another district or division in which venue is proper, if such transfer is in the interest of justice. See Balawajder v. Scott, 160 F.3d 1066 (5th Cir. 1998).

         II. Discussion

         The plaintiff claims that his cause of action arose in and Dr. Parker is employed at OCC in Monroe, Louisiana, which is within the geographical boundaries of Ouachita Parish and the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana. 28 U.S.C. § 98(c). The plaintiff does not allege that the defendants reside or are located within this district. The interest of justice dictates that venue is proper in the Western District of Louisiana.

         III. Recommendation

         It is therefore RECOMMENDED that the instant matter be TRANSFERRED to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.

         It is further RECOMMENDED that ruling on plaintiff's Motion to Reconsider Pauper Status (Rec. Doc. No. 5) is DEFERRED to the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana.

         A party's failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation in a magistrate judge's report and recommendation within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court, provided that the party has been served with notice that such ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.