Wall v. Wingo

• Court: District Court, District of Columbia
• Decided: August 28, 2025
• Docket: Civil Action No. 2025-2328
• Status: Published

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

JESSE WALL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) Civil Action No. 25-2328 (UNA) ) JUDGE ELIZABETH WINGO, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on consideration of Plaintiff’s application to proceed in

forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) and pro se complaint (ECF No. 1, “Compl.”). The Court GRANTS

the application and DISMISSES the complaint without prejudice.

Plaintiff fancies himself “a duly appointed Ambassador of John August Wall Territory, a

sovereign foreign entity created by treaty and recognized by land patent law under U.S. treaty and

constitutional supremacy[.]” Compl. ¶ 5; see id. ¶¶ 6-7. As such, he declares himself beyond the

jurisdiction of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. See, e.g., id. ¶¶ 9, 11, 14, 50, 63.

Notwithstanding his purported diplomatic status, plaintiff is the respondent in a matter which

resulted in the issuance of a civil protection order against him. See, e.g., id. ¶¶ 44, 49, 76, 81, 84.

He brings this action against the Associate and Magistrate Judges presiding over the civil

protection case, the former Chief Judge of the Superior Court, and the Assistant Attorney General

representing the District of Columbia. See id. ¶¶ 8-9. Plaintiff demands a declaratory judgment,

an award of $18 million, an injunction halting further proceedings against him in the Superior

Court, dismissal of all charges against him, and the arrest of the individual who filed the petition

for a civil protection order. See id. at 11 (page number designated by CM/ECF).

1 Of the complaint’s many defects, the Court highlights three. For starters, the defendant

judges are immune from suit. It appears that Plaintiff’s claims against them arise from actions

taken in their judicial capacities, and his claim for monetary damages is barred. See Mirales v.

Waco, 502 U.S. 9 (1991) (finding that “judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from

ultimate assessment of damages); Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 364 (1978) (concluding that

state judge was “immune from damages liability even if his [decision] was in error”); Pierson v.

Ray, 386 U.S. 547, 553-54 (1967) (“Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law

than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial

jurisdiction, as this Court recognized when it adopted the doctrine, in Bradley v. Fisher, 13 Wall.

335, 20 L. Ed. 646 (1872).”).

Likewise, because it appears that actions taken by the Assistant Attorney General also were

taken as, essentially, the prosecutor in the civil protection matter, prosecutorial immunity protects

her from Plaintiff’s claims for monetary damages. See Moore v. Motz, 437 F. Supp. 2d 88, 92

(D.D.C. 2006) (citing Imbler v. Patchman, 424 U.S. 409, 427 (1976)).

Insofar as Plaintiff asks this Court to review or reverse the orders of the Superior Court

judges, or otherwise to direct the Superior Court’s actions, this Court lacks jurisdiction to do so.

See Brown v. District of Columbia, No. 23-7129, 2024 WL 1693616, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 18,

2024) (per curiam) (“The district court did not err by dismissing appellant’s complaint for lack of

subject matter jurisdiction because the complaint sought judicial review of decisions issued by the

Superior Court of the District of Columbia.”). “And because United States district courts do not

have authority to review or otherwise interfere with ongoing D.C. Superior Court matters, when

presented with a request to do so, the Court must dismiss the claim.” George v. US Bank, No. 24-

cv-1598, 2025 WL 973495, at *2 (D.D.C. Apr. 1, 2025) (citation and internal quotation marks

2 omitted), appeal docketed, No. 25-7041 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 4, 2025); see Rowland v. Superior Court

Building B, No. 14-cv-450, 2014 WL 1321106, at *1 (D.D.C. Mar. 20, 2014) (“This Court has no

authority to review or reverse the decisions of a Superior Court judge, or to direct the activities of

that court.”).

An Order is issued separately.

/s/ JIA M. COBB United States District Judge DATE: August 28, 2025