Opinion
Case: 1:16-cv-00648
03-30-2016
MarQuell Alonzo Derrington, Plaintiff, v. D.C. DOC, Defendant.
Assigned To : Unassigned
Assign. Date : 4/6/2016
Description: Pro Se Gen. Civil MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the plaintiff's application and dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth generally at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available only when a "federal question" is presented or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. A party seeking relief in the district court must at least plead facts that bring the suit within the court's jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Failure to plead such facts warrants dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
Plaintiff is an inmate at the District of Columbia Jail. He seeks compensation from the D.C. Department of Corrections for alleged injuries he suffered when he "attempt[ed] to get down from the top bunk" in his cell. Compl. at 6. Plaintiff alleges that he "slipped and split the left side of [his] face open above [his] left eye on the desk top that is usually and commonly used by inmates to get down from the top bunk since there are no stools or ladders[.]" Id. Although plaintiff has utilized the form complaint for bringing a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the alleged facts do not present a federal question. Furthermore, the D.C. Department of Corrections is a non-suable entity, and the District of Columbia "like the fifty states, is not subject to diversity jurisdiction." Long v. District of Columbia, 820 F. 2d 409, 414 (D.C. Cir. 1987). Plaintiff's recourse lies, if at all, in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. Hence, this case will be dismissed without prejudice.
/s/_________
United States District Judge DATE: March 30, 2016