Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Marinov v. United Auto Worker

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division, Lafayette

July 2, 2019

VASSIL MARKOV MARINOV, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED AUTO WORKER, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          JAMES T. MOODY, JUDGE

         This matter is before the court on defendant International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW's (“International Union”) motion to dismiss for improper venue. (DE # 16.) For the reasons that follow, the court denies the motion.

         I. BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff Vassil Markov Marinov's complaint alleges that, as part of his employment with Fiat Chrysler Automotive, in Kokomo, Indiana, he was inappropriately included as a member of the defendant International Union and its local affiliate, Local 685. (DE # 1.) Plaintiff contends that union dues were improperly deducted from his Chrysler paychecks, and that the deduction of union dues from his paychecks is contrary to his religious beliefs.

         Defendant now moves to dismiss plaintiff's complaint for improper venue pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(3) and 28 U.S.C. § 1406. (DE # 16.)

         II. LEGAL STANDARD

         On consideration of a Rule 12(b)(3) motion to dismiss for improper venue, a court must resolve all factual disputes and draw all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor. Faulkenberg v. CB Tax Franchise Sys., LP, 637 F.3d 801, 806 (7th Cir. 2011). When ruling on such a motion, a district court may examine facts outside the complaint without converting the motion to a motion for summary judgment. Johnson v. Orkin, LLC, 556 Fed.Appx. 543, 544-45 (7th Cir. 2014); Cont'l Cas. Co. v. Am. Nat. Ins. Co., 417 F.3d 727, 733 (7th Cir. 2005). Venue can be proper in more than one district. See Armstrong v. LaSalle Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 552 F.3d 613, 617 (7th Cir. 2009).

         Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), 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 a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated; 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.

         “[A]n entity with the capacity to sue and be sued in its common name under applicable law, whether or not incorporated, shall be deemed to reside, if a defendant, in any judicial district in which such defendant is subject to the court's personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c)(2). The residency of a labor union, for venue purposes, is determined by the residency of the entity itself - not the residency of its individual members. Denver & R. G. W. R. Co. v. Bhd. of R. R. Trainmen, 387 U.S. 556, 559 (1967).

         III. ANALYSIS

         Defendant argues that because it operates out of its Detroit, Michigan office, venue is proper in the Eastern District of Michigan pursuant to § 1391(b)(1). (DE # 17 at 5.) Defendant argues that venue would also be appropriate in the Southern District of Indiana pursuant to § 1391(b)(2), because a substantial portion of the events or omissions giving rise to plaintiff's claim occurred in Kokomo, Indiana, which is located in the Southern District of Indiana. (Id. at 6.) Defendant argues that because it does not reside in the Northern District of Indiana, and a substantial ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.