Summerlin v. Patton, No. 9:2018cv00123 - Document 8 (E.D. Tex. 2018)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. This civil rights action is TRANSFERRED to the Houston Division of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Signed by Magistrate Judge Keith F. Giblin on 7/19/18. (ljw, )

Download PDF
Summerlin v. Patton Doc. 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LUFKIN DIVISION JOSEPH SUMMERLIN § VS. § CANDI PATTON § CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:18cv123 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Joseph Summerlin, an inmate confined at the Stringfellow Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Candi Patton. Plaintiff complains of incidents that occurred at the Ellis Unit. Discussion The Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1981, et. seq., under which this case is brought, does not contain a specific venue provision. Accordingly, venue in civil rights cases is controlled by 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Jones v. Bales, 58 F.R.D. 453 (N.D. Ga. 1972), aff'd per curiam, 480 F.2d 805 (5th Cir. 1973). When, as in this case, jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity of citizenship, 28 U.S.C. § 1391 provides that venue is proper only in the judicial district where the defendants reside or in which the claim arose. Plaintiff’s claim arose at the Ellis Unit, which is located in Walker County, Texas. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 124, Walker County is located in the Houston Division of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. As a result, the court is of the opinion this matter should be transferred to the Southern District. It is accordingly Dockets.Justia.com ORDERED that this civil rights action is TRANSFERRED to the Houston Division of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. SIGNED this the 19th day of July, 2018. ____________________________________ KEITH F. GIBLIN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.