[ad_1]
Judiciary
‘Venue is not a continental breakfast’ judge forced to eat his words after 5th Circuit blocks transfer
A federal judge in Texas who declared that “venue is not a continental breakfast,” allowing litigants to pick and choose where to file a lawsuit, should not have transferred a case to Washington, D.C., a federal appeals court has ruled. (Image from Shutterstock)
A federal judge in Texas who declared that “venue is not a continental breakfast,” allowing litigants to pick and choose where to file a lawsuit, should not have transferred a case to Washington, D.C., a federal appeals court has ruled.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at New Orleans ruled that U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman of the Northern District of Texas did not have jurisdiction to rule on venue because of a pending appeal, which challenges his refusal to act on a request for an immediate injunction in the case.
Reuters, Law.com and Law Dork have coverage of the April 5 decision in stories noted by How Appealing here and here.
Pittman is a judge in the Northern District of Texas, a district favored by conservatives challenging Biden administration policies.
Pittman had transferred a suit challenging an $8 cap on credit card late fees adopted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Pittman reopened the case Monday, according to Law.com.
The appeals court said its decision was “exceedingly narrow and procedural, focused not on the correctness of the district court’s transfer order but rather on whether the court had jurisdiction to enter it.”
Pittman and the author of the 5th Circuit decision, Judge Don R. Willett, are appointees of former President Donald Trump.
Law Dork is highlighting a second case involving a venue dispute before the 5th Circuit involving a challenge by Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s SpaceX to the structure of the National Labor Relations Board. A federal judge in the Southern District of Texas transferred the case to a California federal court in February. A 5th Circuit panel refused to block the transfer, leading the full 5th Circuit to consider whether to rehear the issue.
The 5th Circuit is acting amid a debate over “judge shopping,” the practice of filing cases in single-judge divisions of district courts that are thought to favor the plaintiffs. To combat the problem, the U.S. Judicial Conference recommended last month that cases filed in single-judge divisions should be randomly assigned to cases throughout a federal district court, if the cases could have nationwide or statewide impact.
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas has said it won’t implement the recommendation at this time.
According to the New York Times, “The Northern District of Texas is arguably the jurisdiction that has been used to greatest effect by conservatives looking for judges willing to advance their policy agenda with sweeping nationwide injunctions. It has several one-judge and two-judge divisions, where appointees of … Trump are sure to preside over any case filed there.”
[ad_2]
