Rowland v. United States Superior Court

District of Columbia

Rowland v. United States Superior Court

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia

DecidedJanuary 30, 2014

DocketCivil Action No. 2014-0138

StatusPublished

This text of Rowland v. United States Superior Court (Rowland v. United States Superior Court) 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

Rowland v. United States Superior Court, (D.D.C. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT "AN 3 n zoll' w OF c%'.:.'z::,~§i..‘:'::.';::.;‘;::z:'.:':,::zi

DAVONTA MELVIN ROWLAND, ) )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. "'

UNITED STATES SUPERIOR COURT, ) )

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff’ s application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint.

According to plaintiff, on November 19, 2013, Judge Melvin Wright of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia issued an Order which "clearly breaks laws of our United States Constitution." Compl. at l. For this alleged abuse of process, negligence and legal malpractice, plaintiff demands compensation of $6,000,000,000,000.00. Id. If the Court were to grant plaintiff the relief she demands, the Court necessarily must review or reverse the decision of a Superior Court judge. This is a matter over which this Court has no jurisdiction See, e.g., Mooreman v. U.S. Bank, N.A., No. l()-l2l9, 2010 WL 2884661, at *l (D.D.C. July l0, 2()10); Flemz'ng v. United States, 847 F. Supp. l70, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), ajj"’d, 1994 WL 474995 (D.C. Cir. 1994), cert. denz`ed, 513 U.S. 1150 (1995). Accordingly, the

Court will dismiss this action. An Order is issued separately.

llnited/Sfates District Judge

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

FILED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT "AN 3 n zoll' w OF c%'.:.'z::,~§i..‘:'::.';::.;‘;::z:'.:':,::zi

DAVONTA MELVIN ROWLAND, ) )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. "'

UNITED STATES SUPERIOR COURT, ) )

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter comes before the court on review of plaintiff’ s application to proceed in forma pauperis and pro se civil complaint. The Court will grant the application, and dismiss the complaint.

According to plaintiff, on November 19, 2013, Judge Melvin Wright of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia issued an Order which "clearly breaks laws of our United States Constitution." Compl. at l. For this alleged abuse of process, negligence and legal malpractice, plaintiff demands compensation of $6,000,000,000,000.00. Id. If the Court were to grant plaintiff the relief she demands, the Court necessarily must review or reverse the decision of a Superior Court judge. This is a matter over which this Court has no jurisdiction See, e.g., Mooreman v. U.S. Bank, N.A., No. l()-l2l9, 2010 WL 2884661, at *l (D.D.C. July l0, 2()10); Flemz'ng v. United States, 847 F. Supp. l70, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), ajj"’d, 1994 WL 474995 (D.C. Cir. 1994), cert. denz`ed, 513 U.S. 1150 (1995). Accordingly, the

Court will dismiss this action. An Order is issued separately.

llnited/Sfates District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Rowland v. United States Superior Court, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rowland-v-united-states-superior-court-dcd-2014.