Jarvis v. District of Columbia
This text of Jarvis v. District of Columbia (Jarvis v. District of Columbia) 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.
Opinion
FILED
UNITED sTATEs DISTRICT CoURT JAN 3 o 2014 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBlA Clsrk, U.s. Dlstrict & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of columbia
Derek N. Jarvis, ) )
Piaintiff, )
)
v. ) Civil Action No. "`
l
The District of Columbia et al., ) )
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM OPlNlON
This matter is before the Court on review of the plaintiff’s pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the 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).
In this action captioned "Complaint for Relief of: Reckless Govemment Mismanagement Neglect, Conspiracy to Deprive Rights, Violation of Equal Rights Under the Law, Govemment Sanctioned Fraud, 42 U.S.C. and Failure to Prevent Act(s)," the plaintiff sues the District of Columbia for equitable relief and monetary damages exceeding $l million. The "dispute arises out of how the D.C. Superior Court handled the administration of the Estate of [the plaintiffs father]." Compl. at 2.
Jurisdietion is wanting because a federal district court is not a reviewing court and thus, as a general rule applicable here, lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review the decisions of a
state court. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1332 (general jurisdictional provisions); Fleming v, Um`tea’ 1
States, 847 F. Supp. 170, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), cert. denied 513 U.S. 1150 (l995) (citing District ofColumbia Court ofAppeals v. Fela'man, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983); R00ker v. Fl`delity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 4l5, 416 (1923)). Because the instant complaint essentially seeks review of the local probate court’s rulings, it will be dismissed. See Chen v Raz, 172 F.3d 918 (D.C. Cir. l999) ("Because appellant's complaint seeks review of the Superior Court's decisions in the probate of his late wife's estate, the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.") (citations
omitted). A separate order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Date: january 2 ,2014
U t d States District Judge
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jarvis v. District of Columbia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jarvis-v-district-of-columbia-dcd-2014.