Theoneste v. Singh-Mann

CourtDistrict Court, District of Columbia
DecidedMay 14, 2010
DocketCivil Action No. 2010-0786
StatusPublished

This text of Theoneste v. Singh-Mann (Theoneste v. Singh-Mann) 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
Theoneste v. Singh-Mann, (D.D.C. 2010).

Opinion

|\5

FILED

MAY ‘i 4 2010

C'@rk. u.s. uzsrr

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTR]CT OF COLUMBlA

Courts for the sta

) Nkusi Theoneste, ) ) Plaintiff, )

) _ 10 ()'786

v. ) Civil Action N0. ) Sewa Singh-Mann, ) ) Defendant. ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINIGN

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff s pro se complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis The Court will grant plaintiff s application and dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The subject matter jurisdiction of the federal district courts is limited and is set forth generally at 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332. Under those statutes, federal jurisdiction is available only when a "federal question" is presented or the parties are of diverse citizenship and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. A party seeking relief in the district court must at least plead facts that bring the suit within the court's jurisdiction See Fed. R. Civ. P. S(a). Failure to plead such facts warrants dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. l2(h)(3).

Plaintiff, a resident of Arlington, Virginia, sues a resident of Woodbridge, Virginia, for alleged injuries resulting from a car accident in August 1997. Plaintiff attaches to the complaint documents showing that the Superior Court of the District of Columbia has previously dismissed a case apparently arising from the same set of facts. The current complaint does not present a

federal question and does not provide a basis for diversity jurisdiction because the parties reside

`\N

in the same state. To the extent that plaintiff is seeking review of the Superior Court’s dismissal order, this Court lacks jurisdiction to review the decisions of any other court. Fleming v. United States, 847 F. Supp. 170, 172 (D.D.C. 1994), cert. denied 513 U.S. 1150 (1995). A separate

Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.

?/t,»\ z\ hl/*<»/L_,

ll'h/ited States District Judge

Date:May H ,2010

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

Related

Fleming v. United States
847 F. Supp. 170 (District of Columbia, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Theoneste v. Singh-Mann, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/theoneste-v-singh-mann-dcd-2010.