Opinion
Civil Action 24-0609 (UNA)
03-18-2024
AMANDA ALICE RADI, Plaintiff, v. JUDGE DENISE MARSHAL, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
RANDOLPH D. MOSS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. 2) and pro se complaint (Dkt. 1). The Court GRANTS the application, and for the reasons discussed below, DISMISSES the complaint and this civil action without prejudice.
It appears plaintiff, a California resident, is or was the defendant in proceedings, likely a domestic relations matter, before Judge Denise Marshall in the Superior Court of Dougherty County, Georgia. Plaintiff alleges that Judge Marshall was “bias[ed], rude and acted [in an] unprofessional” manner, see Compl. (ECF No. 1) at 5, in conducting hearings on May 23, 2023, and January 12, 2024, see id. at 4, and issuing orders on those same dates, see id. at 5. Plaintiff alleges Judge Marshall refused to consider “facts, evidence and court orders . . . from outside the state of Georgia.” Id. In this action, plaintiff asks the Court to “declare the order a nullity,” id., and to order a new hearing, see id. Plaintiff also demands Judge Marshall's recusal. See generally id., Ex. (ECF No. 1-2). This Court has no jurisdiction over such matters. It neither may review a Georgia court's orders, see Gray v. Poole, 275 F.3d 1113, 1119 (D.C. Cir. 2002) (“The Rooker-Feldman doctrine prevents lower federal courts from hearing cases that amount to the functional equivalent of an appeal from a state court.”), nor insert itself in a domestic relations matter, see Bennett v. Bennett, 682 F.2d 1039, 1042 (D.C. Cir. 1982) (explaining that domestic relationship exception divests federal court of jurisdiction over “grant[ing] a divorce, determining] alimony or support obligations, or resolv[ing] parental conflicts over the custody of their children”).
An Order is issued separately.