Jackson v. United States

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedMarch 22, 2013
DocketCivil Action No. 2013-0372
StatusPublished

This text of Jackson v. United States (Jackson v. United States) 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
Jackson v. United States, (D.D.C. 2013).

Opinion

wl

FILED

UNITED STATES Drsruicr coURT MAR 2 2 2013 FGR THE DISTRICT GF COLUMBIA Clerk U S District & Bankruptcy Courts fdr t'he District of Co|umb|a

Joanne Edmonds Jackson, ) )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No.

United States of America, ) )

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiffs pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant plaintiffs application to proceed in forma pauperis and will dismiss this action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(h)(3) (requiring the court to dismiss an action "at any time" it determines that subject matter jurisdiction is Wanting).

Plaintiff, a resident of Suitland, Maryland, sues the United States for $200 million in damages for an alleged "illegal" hospitalization, among other wrongs. Compl. at 2. A claim for monetary damages against the United States is cognizable for certain misconduct under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2671 et seq. Such a claim is maintainable, however, only after the plaintiff has exhausted administrative remedies by "first present[ing] the claim to the appropriate Federal agency. . . ." 28 U.S.C. § 2675. This exhaustion requirement is jurisdictional See GAF Corp. v. United States, 818 F.Zd 90l, 917-20 (D.C. Cir. 1987); Jackson v. United States, 730 F.Zd 808, 809 (D.C. Cir. 1984); Slokes v. U.S. Postal Servz`ce, 937 F. Supp.

l l, 14 (D.D.C. l996). Since plaintiff has not indicated that she exhausted her administrative

remedies under the FTCA, this case will be dismissed. See Abdurrahman v. Engstrom, 168 Fed.Appx. 445, 445 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (_per curiam) ("[T]he district court properly dismissed case

[based on unexhausted FTCA claim] for lack of subject matter jurisdiction."). A separate Order

United States District Judge

accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

Date: March 273 ,2013

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

Related

Abdurrahman v. Engstrom
168 F. App'x 445 (D.C. Circuit, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jackson v. United States, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-united-states-dcd-2013.