Lucky v. Capital One Bank
This text of Lucky v. Capital One Bank (Lucky v. Capital One Bank) 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 NOV -1 2011 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 0lerk, u.s. District & Bankruptcy FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Gourts for t.he Dlstritt of Columbl,
MICHAEL R. LUCKY,
1~12 Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. 11 CAPIT AL ONE BANK, et aI.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff s application to proceed in forma pauperis and
pro se complaint. The application will be granted and the complaint will be dismissed.
Plaintiffs complaint describes his encounters with staff at a Capital One Bank branch in
Washington, D.C., which culminated in his expulsion from the branch. Plaintiff "ask[s] the court
to grant [him] 25000 dollars for conspiracy to organized crime which resaulted [sic] to mental
anguish." Compi. at 12 (page number designated by the Court).
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. In addition, federal district courts
have jurisdiction over civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000, and the suit
is between citizens of different states. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). This complaint neither states a
federal claim, establishes diversity of citizenship of the parties, nor avers that the matter in
controversy exceeds $75,000. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss this action for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction. An Order accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Lucky v. Capital One Bank, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lucky-v-capital-one-bank-dcd-2011.