COSBY v. JOHNSON et al, No. 1:2012cv00786 - Document 3 (D.D.C. 2012)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION Signed by Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on 4/21/2012. (ls, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-~-~ - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - /Ill FILED UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MAY 1 6 2012 Clerk, U.S. District & Bankruptcy Courts for the District of Columbia Leona Cosby, Plaintiff, V. Leroy Johnson et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No. 12 0786 MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs prose complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court will grant 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. ยงยง 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 ofthe action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). Plaintiff, a District of Columbia resident of what the Court judicially notices to be a homeless shelter, sues two individuals listed as residing at the same location for alleged sexual harassment, battery, theft and other misconduct. The instant complaint neither presents a federal question nor provides a basis for diversity jurisdiction because the parties are not of diverse citizenship and plaintiff does not seek monetary relief. Plaintiffs recourse lies, if at all, in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. A separate Order of dismissal accompanies this Memorandum Opinion. Ctl~) Date: April 2;/.4 2012 v)&c Y);<~_b United States Distnct Judge 2 ""'7
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
