SUSAN O. HICKEY, District Judge.
Before the Court is a Motion to Transfer (ECF No. 48) filed on behalf of Defendants Gerald Robinson, Stanley James, and Lafayette Woods. Plaintiff David Harrell ("Harrell") has responded. (ECF No. 50). The Court finds the matter ripe for consideration.
This case arises out of David Harrell's employment with the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department ("Jefferson County"). Jefferson County employed David Harrell from March 15, 2007, to November 3, 2009. During his employment, Defendants Robinson, James, and Woods ("the Jefferson County Defendants") were supervisory officers.
In his complaint, Harrell alleges employment discrimination claims against the Jefferson County Defendants.
The Jefferson County Defendants move to transfer this action to the Eastern District of Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). The Jefferson County Defendants argue that because the Jefferson County Defendants and Harrell are residents of Jefferson County, the Eastern District of Arkansas is a more convenient forum. The City of Pine Bluff is located in Jefferson County, and Jefferson County is in the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Section 1404 (a) states: "For the convenience of the parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought." As the text of Section 1404(a) makes clear, the Court must consider the convenience of the parties, the convenience of the witnesses, and the interest of justice. Terra Int'l. Inc. v. Miss. Chem. Corp., 119 F.3d 688, 691 (8th Cir. 1997). A district court enjoys "much discretion" when deciding whether to grant a motion to transfer. Id. at 697. However, transfer motions "should not be freely granted." In re Nine Mile Ltd., 692 F.2d 56, 61 (8th Cir. 1982), abrogated on other grounds by Mo. Hous. Dev. Comm'n v. Brice, 191 F.2d 1306 (8th Cir. 1990).
In this case, the Court finds that transfer of the case to the Eastern District of Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division is warranted. First, there is no dispute that this case "might have been brought" in the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Harrell asserts that transfer is inappropriate because it would disrupt his choice of forum. Normally, there is a presumption in favor of the plaintiff's forum. Christensen Hatch Farms, Inc., v. Peavey Co., 505 F.Supp. 903, 911 (D. Minn. 1981). However, courts afford significantly less deference to a plaintiff's choice when a plaintiff does not reside, and the underlying facts did not occur, in the selected forum. Moretti v. Wyeth, Inc., No. 07-3920, 2008 WL 732497, at * 1 (D. Minn. March 17, 2008); Nelson v. Soo Line R.R. Co., 58 F.Supp.2d 1023, 1026 (D. Minn. 1999). In this case, Harrell does not reside in the Western District of Arkansas, and most of the underlying facts occurred in the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the Court finds that the Jefferson County Defendants' Motion to Transfer (ECF No. 48) should be and hereby is