Opinion
C.A. No. 20-979 (MN)
03-23-2021
SURENDRA MOHAN KUMAR, M.D. and NEETA ABROL KUMAR, Plaintiffs, v. CHARLES MAHONE, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
At Wilmington, this 23rd day of March 2021:
1. Background. On June 17, 2020, Plaintiffs commenced this action in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware in and for Kent County, C.A. No. K20C-06-00024 WLW. (D.I. 1). According to the Complaint, there was an altercation between Plaintiff Surendra Mohan Kumar, M.D. ("Dr. Kumar) and Defendant Charles Malone ("Malone"), the store manager of a CVS located in Crofton, Maryland. The Anne Arundel County Police were called as a result of the altercation. The Plaintiffs reside in Smyrna, Delaware, an approximate one and one-half hour drive from Crofton, Maryland. The Complaint states that Plaintiff filed the Complaint in Kent County, Delaware, because Dr. Kumar is an older man and cannot drive frequently to Anne Arundel County, Maryland.
2. Discussion. On July 23, 2020, Defendants removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 on the basis of diversity of citizenship of the parties and an amount in controversy of over $75,000.
3 The claim arose in Maryland, records (including police reports) are located in Maryland, witnesses are from Maryland, and Maryland law is the applicable law in this diversity case. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a), "[f]or the convenience of the parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought." A court may transfer a case at the parties' request or sua sponte. See e.g., Danziger & De Llano, LLP v. Morgan Verkamp LLC, 948 F.3d 124, 132 (3d Cir. 2020) (citing 28 U.S.C. §§ 1404(a), 1406(a); Amica Mut. Ins. Co. v. Fogel, 656 F.3d 167, 171 (3d Cir. 2011) (recognizing sua sponte transfers).
4. After reviewing the file, this Court ordered the parties to address whether this case should be transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. (See D.I. 13). The parties responded that they do not object to a transfer. (See D.I. 14, 15). The Court considers the allegations in the Complaint and finds it appropriate to transfer the action to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.
5. Conclusion. For the above reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. All pending motions (D.I. 3, 5, 9) are DENIED without prejudice to renew upon transfer.
/s/_________
The Honorable Maryellen Norieka
United States District Judge