United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
TERRANCE L. JAMES-BEY,  Plaintiff,
KENNETH LASSITER, et al., Defendants.
D. Whitney, Chief United States District Judge
MATTER is before the Court on initial review of the
Complaint, (Doc. No. 1).
pro se Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the
Albemarle Correctional Institution in Badin, North Carolina.
He seeks emergency relief for alleged violations of his
religious rights at Albemarle C.I. pursuant to the Religious
Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 USC 2000cc
et seq. He also cites two criminal statutes,
18 U.S.C. §§ 241 and 242. He names as Defendants:
Kenneth Lassiter, Mr. Leach, Ms. Copple, Superintendent 1
John Doe Mr. Clelland, Superintendent 2 John Doe, C.O.
Redisivick, Sergeant Hounds, C.O. Hurley, C.O. Eudy, Ms. C.
McBride, Erik A. Hooks, Religious Coordinator Barbara Brown,
Sergeant Dennis, and Ms. McNeil.
the allegations liberally, Plaintiff claims to be a Moorish
American National who has experienced “continuous
persecution and assault” at Albemarle C.I. because of
his religion. (Doc. No. 1 at 3). He seeks declaratory
judgment, damages, injunctive relief, and such other relief
as the Court deems necessary and proper. (Doc. No. 1 at 5).
the general venue provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), 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 (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 venue purposes, a “natural
person” resides in the district where the person is
domiciled. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(1).
the 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) venue requirements are
satisfied, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), “[f]or
the convenience of the parties and witnesses, in the interest
of justice, ” a court may transfer a civil action to
any district where the action “might have originally
been brought.” In determining whether transfer is
appropriate, courts commonly consider the following factors:
(1) plaintiff's initial choice of the forum; (2) the
relative ease of access to sources of proof; (3) availability
of compulsory process for attendance of unwilling, and the
costs of obtaining attendance of willing, witnesses; (4)
possibility of view of premises, if view would be appropriate
to the action; (5) enforceability of a judgment if one is
obtained; (6) relative advantages and obstacles to a fair
trial; (7) all other practical problems that make a trial
easy, expeditious, and inexpensive; (8) administrative
difficulties of court congestion; (9) local interests in
having localized controversies settled at home; (10) the
appropriateness in having the trial of a diversity case in a
forum that is at home with the state law that must govern the
action; and (11) avoidance of unnecessary problems with
conflict of laws. Datasouth Computer Corp. v. Three
Dimensional Techs., Inc., 719 F.Supp. 446, 450-51 (W.D.
presently resides at the Albemarle C.I. where the alleged
incidents occurred, which is located in Badin County in the
Middle District of North Carolina. The Defendants appear to
work at either the Albemarle C.I., or at the North Carolina
Department of Public Safety's Raleigh office in Wake
County, which is in the Eastern Districts of North Carolina.
To the extent that Plaintiff may be able to state a
cognizable claim against any Defendant,  venue would be
proper in the Middle or Eastern District of North Carolina.
The Middle District of North Carolina appears to be the most
appropriate venue for this action because it is where the
events giving rise to the claims occurred and where the
majority of the Defendants are located.
reasons stated herein, this action will be transferred to the
Middle District of North Carolina, where the events at issue
are alleged to have occurred and where the majority of the
Defendants are located.
IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
Clerk of this Court is hereby ordered to transfer this action
to the ...