What You'll Learn

  • When Section 1391 applies
  • Defendant-residence venue
  • Events-or-property venue
  • The fallback provision
  • Residence definitions
  • Waiver and exam method

Educational information only; not legal advice. This article is a general study aid and should be checked against current authority and course materials.

Jurisdiction asks whether a court has power. Venue asks whether a particular geographic district is a legally permitted place for the action. A district may be inconvenient yet proper, or convenient yet improper. Section 1391 solves the threshold venue question before transfer doctrines address convenience.

1. When Section 1391 Applies

Section 1391 generally governs civil actions brought in federal district court. It does not select the initial federal destination of a removed action; § 1441(a) sends a removed case to the district embracing the state court.

Key Takeaway

Venue does not create subject-matter jurisdiction or personal jurisdiction. A plaintiff must satisfy each threshold independently, even when some facts overlap.

2. Section 1391(b)(1): Defendant Residence

Venue is proper in a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the state in which that district is located. The same-state condition is essential.

Exam Tip

D1 resides in the Northern District of Texas and D2 resides in the Southern District of Texas. Because both defendants reside in Texas, venue may be proper under (b)(1) in a district where either defendant resides. If the defendants reside in different states, (b)(1) does not apply, even though one defendant resides in the chosen district. The plaintiff should then test (b)(2).

3. Section 1391(b)(2): Substantial Events or Property

Venue is proper in a district where a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, or where a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated.

The chosen district need not contain the single most substantial event. More than one district can qualify. The court examines the acts and omissions that directly gave rise to the claim rather than merely locating the plaintiff's injury or later consequences.

Contract signals

Negotiation, execution, performance, required payment, delivery, and breach.

Tort signals

Challenged conduct, injury-producing event, material omissions, and relevant property.

4. Section 1391(b)(3): The True Fallback

The fallback permits venue in any district where any defendant is subject to personal jurisdiction for the action, but only when there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought under (b)(1) or (b)(2).

Common Mistake

Do not use (b)(3) simply because it is convenient or because personal jurisdiction exists. First show that no federal district qualifies under the residence or substantial-events provisions.

5. Who Resides Where?

Party Venue residence

Natural person lawfully admitted for permanent residence The judicial district of domicile.

Entity as defendant Any district where the entity is subject to personal jurisdiction with respect to the action.

Entity as plaintiff Only the district where it maintains its principal place of business.

Defendant not resident in the United States May be sued in any judicial district; such a defendant is disregarded in determining venue for other defendants under (b)(1).

For a corporation in a state with multiple federal districts, § 1391(d) generally treats each district as though it were a separate state for personal-jurisdiction contacts. If no district independently qualifies, the corporation is deemed to reside in the district with the most significant contacts.

6. Venue Is Waivable

Improper venue is a Rule 12(b)(3) defense and is generally waived if omitted from the defendant's first Rule 12 response. That differs from subject-matter jurisdiction, which cannot be waived.

7. Worked Hypothetical

Key Takeaway

A New York company sues two defendants in federal court in Colorado. D1 resides in Utah, D2 resides in Nevada, and the contract was negotiated, performed, and allegedly breached in Colorado. Because the defendants reside in different states, (b)(1) is unavailable. Venue is likely proper in Colorado under (b) (2) because substantial contract events occurred there. There is no reason to reach the fallback.

8. Exam Checklist

  1. Ask whether the case was brought originally or removed. 2. Apply (b)(1) and verify that all defendants reside in the same state. 3. Apply (b)(2) to substantial events, omissions, or property. 4. Use (b)(3) only if no district works under the first two. 5. Apply the correct residence rule for each defendant. 6. After deciding proper venue, analyze transfer or dismissal separately. 7. Check Rule 12 waiver.

Primary Authorities

  • 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

  • Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(3), 12(g), and 12(h)(1).

  • Leroy v. Great Western United Corp., 443 U.S. 173 (1979).

  • Polizzi v. Cowles Magazines, Inc., 345 U.S. 663 (1953).

Exam-ready conclusion

Section 1391 often identifies several proper districts. Follow the statute in order, do not confuse residence with citizenship, reserve the fallback for true no-district cases, and separate proper venue from later convenience-based transfer.