Woodard v. Saint Charles County MO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION MICHAEL WOODARD and MARY ) WOODARD, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Case No. 6:25-cv-03265-MDH vs. ) ) ST. CHARLES COUNTY MISSOURI, ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Michael and Mary Woodard’s (“Plaintiffs”) Pro Se Motion for Leave to File In Forma Pauperis. (Doc. 1). Plaintiffs have also attached their Application to Proceed Without Prepaying Fees or Costs in Support. Id. Plaintiffs wish to proceed in forma pauperis seeking to file a Complaint alleging various allegations including being put on trial with no attorney, being found guilty of trespass, “being given” a class E felony for property damage, having a tracer being put on their vehicle and that their child was taken for false allegations. Plaintiffs request $5 million in damages, the return of their child, and for various individuals to be fined and/or jailed. “Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, the decision whether to grant or deny in forma pauperis status is within the sound discretion of the trial court.” Cross v. Gen. Motors Corp., 721 F.2d 1152, 1157 (8th Cir. 1983). The Court is also required to conduct a review of Plaintiff’s Complaint to be filed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (“Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that …. (B) the action or appeal (i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from such relief.”). Here, Plaintiffs’ financial condition and status may well qualify them to proceed in forma pauperis. However, before Plaintiffs may proceed, the Court must preliminarily consider the allegations of the Complaint under the three-prong test. Plaintiffs’ proposed Complaint alleges damages based upon violation of their civil rights. Here, the Court finds that Plaintiffs cannot proceed in forma pauperis in this Court as venue would not be proper within this district. 28 U.S.C. § 1391 governs venue generally and states: A 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. 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). St. Charles, Missouri is located within the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The proper venue for this action would be the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri is not a proper venue as the Defendant does not reside in the Western District of Missouri nor did a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in the Western District of Missouri. “The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a). Here, the Court will transfer the case, and Plaintiffs’ Pro Se Motion for Leave to File In Forma Pauperis to the United States District Court for the Eastern District. CONCLUSION The Court finds Plaintiffs’ filing should be brought in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. For these reasons stated, the Court hereby transfers the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: September 22, 2025 /s/ Douglas Harpool_____________ DOUGLAS HARPOOL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE