Opinion
1:20-cv-00169-HAB-SLC
04-05-2023
OPINION AND ORDER
JUDGE HOLLY A. BRADY UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
On March 30, 2023, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a motion in his present case captioned “Plaintiff's Malpractice Complaint Against Defendant (John Panico).” (ECF No. 90). A review of this filing reveals that Plaintiff is attempting to sue Attorney John Panico, his former counsel, for legal malpractice arising from his actions in representing Plaintiff in this case. Plaintiff, however, cannot file a complaint within a complaint. Rather, if he intends to file suit against his former counsel, he must do so by initiating a separate case naming his attorney as a defendant. Further, a legal malpractice claim is a state law claim and this Court lacks jurisdiction to hear that case absent allegations of diversity of citizenship between the parties. Accordingly, the Court strikes ECF No. 90 and will take no further action on that filing.
SO ORDERED