Johnson v. Department of the Treasury
This text of Johnson v. Department of the Treasury (Johnson v. Department of the Treasury) 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
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
ANDREA P. JOHNSON, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. Civil Action No. 10-1013 (JEB) DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Pro se Plaintiffs Andrea P. Johnson and Alvin Wiggins on June 17, 2010, filed a largely
indecipherable Complaint, the heart of which appears to be a claim related to a disallowed tax
deduction. They named as Defendants the Department of the Treasury, Secretary Timothy
Geithner, and the Internal Revenue Service. No summons was ever signed or affixed with a seal
by the Clerk, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(a)(1). The Court ordered them to show cause ten
months later why the case should not be dismissed for failure to serve Defendants. Plaintiffs
then submitted another unintelligible filing on Apr. 29, 2011, which purported to be their proof
of service. While it did attach certified mail receipts, it did not contain an affidavit, as required
by Rule 4(l)(1), or evince proof that Defendants had been served as required in Rule 4(i)(2).
The Court, however, under the mistaken impression from the docket summaries that
service had been effected, ordered Defendants to file responsive pleadings by July 5, 2011. The
Court on Aug. 30 noted its error and gave Plaintiffs until Sept. 13 to effect service. Nothing has
been accomplished since.
As Defendants have not been properly served – inasmuch as no correct summons exists
and the steps to serve federal government officials have not been followed – and as Plaintiffs
1 have been notified of their deficiencies and given additional opportunities to effect service, the
Court will now dismiss the case without prejudice under Rule 4(m). An Order consistent with
this Opinion will issue this day.
/s/ James E. Boasberg JAMES E. BOASBERG United States District Judge Date: October 4, 2011
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Johnson v. Department of the Treasury, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-department-of-the-treasury-dcd-2011.