Dunbar v. Pelosi

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedMay 28, 2025
DocketCivil Action No. 2025-0667
StatusPublished

This text of Dunbar v. Pelosi (Dunbar v. Pelosi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, District of Columbia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dunbar v. Pelosi, (D.D.C. 2025).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JANIS LAVERN DUNBAR, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-00667 (UNA) ) ) NANCY PELOSI et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This action, brought pro se, is before the Court on review of Plaintiff’s complaint and

application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. For the following reasons, the Court grants the

application and dismisses the complaint.

Plaintiff brings this suit against Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi and Attorney Ben Crump.

She identifies Crump as a District of Columbia “corporation.” Compl., ECF No. 1 at 1. Plaintiff

alleges that at an unspecified time, she contacted Crump by email concerning “Curtis James

Jackson,” id. at 1, an entertainer known professionally as “50 Cent,” id. at 4. According to

Plaintiff, Crump “told” her “to find a lawyer asap,” but “then he goes and hangs with my stalker

and thief at the State Capitol.” Id. Plaintiff alleges that she contacted Pelosi and two other

individuals not named as defendants “about my stalker,” but “they didn’t believe a true story

book[.]” Id. at 3. Plaintiff seeks $100,000,000 from Pelosi and $10,000,000 from Crump, id. at

5, for treating her like “a nobody,” id. at 4.

Although Plaintiff checks the “federal question” box as the basis of jurisdiction, id. at 3,

she does not plausibly plead a claim under “the Constitution [or] laws . . . of the United States,”

28 U.S.C. § 1331, and a “complaint may be dismissed on jurisdictional grounds when,” as here, it is “ ‘patently insubstantial,’ presenting no federal question suitable for decision.’ ” Tooley v.

Napolitano, 586 F.3d 1006, 1009 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (quoting Best v. Kelly, 39 F.3d 328, 330 (D.C.

Cir. 1994)). The Court will, accordingly, dismiss the complaint.

A separate order will issue.

_________/s/____________ RANDOLPH D. MOSS Date: May 28, 2025 United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tooley v. Napolitano
556 F.3d 836 (D.C. Circuit, 2009)
Tony Best v. Sharon Pratt Kelly, Mayor
39 F.3d 328 (D.C. Circuit, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dunbar v. Pelosi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunbar-v-pelosi-dcd-2025.