Opinion
Civil Action No. 08 1995.
October 30, 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.
The complaint alleges that the plaintiff is permanently disabled due to injuires. It seeks payment from the defendant and references a workers compensation decision that was favorable to plaintiff. (Compl. at 1.)
Federal district courts have 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 does not identify a basis for this Court's jurisdiction and does not identify a claim arising under the laws of the United States or otherwise provide sufficient information for the Court to discern a basis for its jurisdiction. Rather, the complaint appears to reflect a dispute between private parties arising under either a private contract or state law or both.
Federal district courts also have jurisdiction over civil actions in matters where the controversy exceeds $75,000 and is between citizens of different states. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). Here, the citizenship of the parties is not clear, but the plaintiff does not assert that the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss the complaint without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. An appropriate order accompanies this memorandum opinion.