Miller v. Ohio Attorney General ( 2015 )


Menu:
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F I L E D
    FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
    Selina Miller, ) comf'for 2’3, &Bankrupw
    ) "Column"
    Plaintiff, )
    ) Case: 1:15—cv-O1169
    V_ ) Assigned To : Unassigned
    ) Assign. Date ' 7/21/2015
    Ohio Attorney General er a1“ ) Description: Pro Se Gen. Civil
    )
    Defendants. )
    )
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    This matter is before the Court on plaintiff‘s pro se complaint and application to proceed
    in forma pauperis. The Court will grant the plaintiffs 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. 8(a). Failure to
    plead such facts warrants dismissal of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
    Plaintiff is a resident of Columbus, Ohio. She has brought a defamation suit against
    Ohio’s Attorney General and three Ohio-based attorneys, seeking $250 million in money
    damages. Jurisdiction is lacking because the complaint does not present a federal question, and
    the parties are not of diverse citizenship. Plaintiff” s recourse lies, if at all, in the appropriate state
    court in Ohio. Hence, this case will be dismissed without prejudice.
    DATE: July /§ ,2015
    

Document Info

Docket Number: Civil Action No. 2015-1169

Judges: Judge Rosemary M. Collyer

Filed Date: 7/21/2015

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/21/2015