Robertson v. Judicial Conduct Comm

Full title: Jerry E. Robertson, Plaintiff, v. Judicial Conduct Comm. et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, D. Columbia

Date published: Sep 25, 2008

Civil Action No. 08-1528 (D.D.C. Sep. 25, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 08-1528.

September 25, 2008

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ROSEMARY COLLYER, District Judge

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant 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, an inmate in Louisville, Kentucky, sues the Judicial Conduct Committee in Lexington, Kentucky, and the Executive Director of the Kentucky Bar Association. The complaint presents neither a federal question nor a basis for diversity jurisdiction inasmuch as all parties are in Kentucky and no amount in controversy is pleaded. Accordingly, the complaint will be dismissed by separate Order issued contemporaneously.