Jennings-Jones v. Sylacauga Health Care Authority et al(MAG+), No. 2:2023cv00574 - Document 11 (M.D. Ala. 2023)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER: it is ORDERED as follows: (1) The objection (Doc. 9 ) is overruled. (2) The magistrate judge's recommendation (Doc. 7 ) is adopted. (3) This case is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to take appropriate steps to effect the transfer. This case is closed in this court. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 12/19/2023. (ggn, )

Download PDF
Jennings-Jones v. Sylacauga Health Care Authority et al(MAG+) Doc. 11 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION IDA JENNINGS-JONES, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff, v. SYLACAUGA HEALTH CARE AUTHORITY, doing business as Coosa Valley Medical Center, et al., Defendants. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23cv574-MHT (WO) OPINION AND ORDER This lawsuit is before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that the case District Court pursuant to 28 be for transferred the U.S.C. to Northern § the District 1406(a), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). United or of States Alabama alternatively, Also before the court is plaintiff’s response to the magistrate judge’s order to show cause as to why this case should not be transferred to the Northern District of Alabama, which the court construes as an objection to the magistrate Dockets.Justia.com judge’s recommendation. In her objections, while plaintiff offers reasons why she does not want the case transferred to the Northern District of Alabama, she does not question or undermine the magistrate judge’s finding that there is no basis for venue in the Middle District of Alabama under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). After an independent and de novo review of the record, and because there is no basis for venue in this court, the court concludes that the objection should be overruled and the magistrate adopted, for the most part. the recommendation plaintiff no longer to judge’s recommendation The court does not adopt the extent resides at it the finds address that she initially provided the court, and that she failed to update her address with the court. Plaintiff provided the correct address when she filed her complaint, where she still resides, but the clerk’s office failed to input that address into the ECF system and accidentally used the wrong address for plaintiff. 2 This error, not anything plaintiff did wrong, resulted in orders being sent to the wrong address. See Order (Doc. 8). Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows: (1) The objection (Doc. 9) is overruled. (2) The magistrate judge's recommendation (Doc. 7) is adopted. (3) This case is transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to take appropriate steps to effect the transfer. This case is closed in this court. DONE, this the 19th day of December, 2023. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

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.