Lee Drone v. Peter D. Bear, et al.

Summary

The court grants a motion to dismiss for improper venue, concluding that none of the defendants resides in California and that the relevant events and property are located in Wisconsin. It dismisses the damages claims against Judge Ryan D. Nilsestuen without leave to amend because judicial immunity bars those claims. The court transfers the remaining claims to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), and terminates the other pending motions as moot without prejudice.

Holdings

1. Venue was improper in the Northern District of California because none of the defendants resided there, a substantial part of the events and property at issue were located in Wisconsin, and the Western District of Wisconsin was an available district satisfying the venue statute.
2. The court could resolve improper venue before deciding personal jurisdiction when prudential considerations justified reversing the usual order of analysis.
3. The damages claims against Judge Nilsestuen were barred by judicial immunity because the challenged acts were judicial acts undertaken within the jurisdiction of his court.
4. The remaining claims should be transferred to the Western District of Wisconsin because venue was improper in California and transfer, rather than dismissal, was in the interest of justice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether venue was proper in the Northern District of California under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).
2. Whether the court could resolve improper venue before deciding personal jurisdiction.
3. Whether claims for damages against Judge Nilsestuen were barred by judicial immunity.
4. Whether the interests of justice favored transferring the remaining claims to the Western District of Wisconsin rather than dismissing them under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a).
5. Whether the entire action should be transferred even though only the Title Company challenged venue.

Disposition

other