28 U.S.C. § 112

New York

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 28 CasesGoogle Scholar

New York is divided into four judicial districts to be known as the Northern, Southern, Eastern, and Western Districts of New York.

Northern District

(a) The Northern District comprises the counties of Albany, Broome, Cayuga, Chenango, Clinton, Columbia, Cortland, Delaware, Essex, Franklin, Fulton, Greene, Hamilton, Herkimer, Jefferson, Lewis, Madison, Montgomery, Oneida, Onondaga, Oswego, Otsego, Rensselaer, Saint Lawrence, Saratoga, Schenectady, Schoharie, Tioga, Tompkins, Ulster, Warren, and Washington.

Court for the Northern District shall be held at Albany, Auburn, Binghamton, Malone, Plattsburgh,11 So in original. “Plattsburgh” appears twice. Syracuse, Utica, Watertown, and Plattsburgh.1

Southern District

(b) The Southern District comprises the counties of Bronx, Dutchess, New York, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, and Westchester and concurrently with the Eastern District, the waters within the Eastern District.

Court for the Southern District shall be held at New York, White Plains, and in the Middletown-Wallkill area of Orange County or such nearby location as may be deemed appropriate.

Eastern District

(c) The Eastern District comprises the counties of Kings, Nassau, Queens, Richmond, and Suffolk and concurrently with the Southern District, the waters within the counties of Bronx and New York.

Court for the Eastern District shall be held at Brooklyn, Hauppauge, Hempstead (including the village of Uniondale), and Central Islip.

Western District

(d) The Western District comprises the counties of Allegany, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung, Erie, Genesee, Livingston, Monroe, Niagara, Ontario, Orleans, Schuyler, Seneca, Steuben, Wayne, Wyoming, and Yates.

Court for the Western District shall be held at Buffalo, Canandaigua, Elmira, Jamestown, and Rochester.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1,349 cases (878 in the last 5 years), 1926–2026 · leading case: Koster v. (Am.) Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 330 U.S. 518 (1947).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Koster v. (Am.) Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 330 U.S. 518 (1947). · cites it 4× “28 U.S.C. § 112 . We need not tarry to consider the small interest of the plaintiff in the assets of his corporation, nor the effect of realigning the corporation on the side of the cause where its true interest lies.”

United States v. Kirk Tang Yuk, 885 F.3d 57 (2d Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 112 (b) ("The [SDNY] comprises the counties of Bronx, Dutchess, New York, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, and Westchester and concurrently with the [EDNY], the waters within the [EDNY].”

Cortez Byrd Chips, Inc. v. Bill Harbert Constr. Co., 529 U.S. 193 (2000). · cites it 3× “At the time, the practical effect of 28 U. S. C. § 112 (a) was that a civil suit could usually be brought only in the district in which the defendant resided.”

New Jersey v. New York, 523 U.S. 767 (1998). · cites it 4× “§ 178 (now 28 U. S. C. § 112 ) places the waters of the New York counties within the concurrent jurisdiction of the Southern and Eastern Districts.”

Keitt v. New York City, 882 F. Supp. 2d 412 (S.D.N.Y. 2011). “At the time of filing this action, Keitt was confined at Upstate Correctional Facility in Franklin County, New York, within the Northern District, see 28 U.S.C. § 112 (a), and he is now confined at Attica, which is within the Western District.”

Baltimore & Ohio R.R. v. Kepner, 314 U.S. 44 (1941). · cites it 4× “, 28 U.S.C. § 112 (suits based upon diversity of citizenship); 28 U.”

Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp., 308 U.S. 165 (1939). · cites it 2× “433 , 28 U.S.C. § 112 . [1] ) We took the case, 307 U.”

Ex Parte Collett, 337 U.S. 55 (1949). · cites it 2× “" As ultimately reported to the House, it repealed all of § 6 of the Federal Employers' Liability Act, except the last sentence prohibiting removal of actions brought in state courts to federal courts; and added the following paragraph to the then general venue statute, § 51 of…”

DESKOVIC v. City of Peekskill, 673 F. Supp. 2d 154 (S.D.N.Y. 2009). “See 28 U.S.C. § 112 (d). 4 . The Court notes that while Plaintiff argues that all Defendants are jointly and severally liable for Tweed’s alleged misconduct, he does not argue that Tweed is jointly and severally liable for the alleged conduct by all other Defendants (the bulk of…”

Rindfleisch v. Gentiva Health Sys., Inc., 752 F. Supp. 2d 246 (E.D.N.Y 2010). · cites it 2× “See 28 U.S.C. § 112 (a). Similarly, plaintiffs state that Michelle Rosenblum "was based out of the Bronx, New York office — within this District — .”

BBF Eng'g Servs., PC v. State of Mich., 573 F. App'x 377 (6th Cir. 2014). “See generally 28 U.S.C. § 112 (b)(2)(A). To that end, MDOT circulates a “Selection Guidelines for Service Contracts.”

Freeman v. Bee Mach. Co., Inc, 319 U.S. 448 (1943). · cites it 2× “” Judicial Code § 51, 28 U. S. C. § 112 . Congress has not made the same requirement on removal.”

Show all 1,349 citing cases →

— 28 U.S.C. § 112(a) — 6 cases

Barber-Greene Co. v. Blaw-Knox Co. & All Purpose Spreader Co., 239 F.2d 774 (6th Cir. 1957).

Brooks v. Yarbrough, 37 F.2d 527 (10th Cir. 1930).

Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 131 F.2d 148 (5th Cir. 1942).

Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co. v. Concrete Steel Bridge Co., 37 F.2d 695 (4th Cir. 1930).

Kruppenbacher v. Annucci (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

— 28 U.S.C. § 112(b) — 1 case

D.O.C.C.S. (W.D.N.Y. 2025).

— 28 U.S.C. § 112(c) — 2 cases

Jeanty v. The City of New York (S.D.N.Y. 2021).

Schaefer v. Martinez (S.D.N.Y. 2022).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.