From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bell v. Dorcey

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Jul 29, 2008
Civil Action No. 08 1368 (D.D.C. Jul. 29, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 08 1368.

July 29, 2008


MEMORANDUM OPINION


This matter comes before the Court on consideration of plaintiff's pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction.

Unlike state courts of general jurisdiction, federal district courts have limited jurisdiction. A federal district court has jurisdiction in civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Here, however, the complaint alleges an assault by a homeless woman in a shelter, a matter that is not governed by federal law.

A federal district court also has jurisdiction over civil actions in matters where the controversy exceeds $75,000 and where there is complete diversity of citizenship among the parties. See 28U.S.C. § 1332(a). Here it appears that both the plaintiff and the defendant are citizens of the District of Columbia, and therefore, complete diversity of citizenship among the parties is lacking. Furthermore, the plaintiff does not state an amount in controversy.

Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the complaint, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. An appropriate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.


Summaries of

Bell v. Dorcey

United States District Court, D. Columbia
Jul 29, 2008
Civil Action No. 08 1368 (D.D.C. Jul. 29, 2008)
Case details for

Bell v. Dorcey

Case Details

Full title:KAREEMAH BELL, Plaintiff, v. NATOSHA DORCEY, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: Jul 29, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No. 08 1368 (D.D.C. Jul. 29, 2008)