METTS v. USA, No. 1:2018cv00864 - Document 8 (Fed. Cl. 2018)
Court Description: UNREPORTED OPINION: Granting 5 Motion to Dismiss - Rule 12(b)(1); Denying 6 Motion for Hearing. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment. Signed by Senior Judge Robert H. Hodges, Jr. U.S. Certified Mail Tracking# 7017 2620 0000 7637 4433(vds) Service on parties made.
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
METTS v. USA Doc. 8 mtntteb ~tates (!Court of jfetreral (!Claims No. 18-864 C Filed: October 5, 2018 CASSANDRA D. METTS, Pro Se Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. Cassandra D. lvletts, pro se plaintiff. Albert Salvatore Iarossi, Esquire, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, D.C., for defendant. ORDER AND OPINION Plaintiff Cassandra D. Metts filed a Complaint in June 2018, seeking damages against the United States related to Social Security disability claims, defamation, "obstruction of religious belief, [and] harassment of [her] religious group and belief system." Metts also requests a comi order charging the defendants with crimes of harassment against church members. Ms. Metts names an array of co-defendants with the United States, including certain "retired Baltimore City & state employees." United States filed a Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to RCFC 12(b)(l). This court generally hears actions against the United States in which Congress has waived its sovereign immunity pursuant to the Tucker Act. See 28 U.S.C. § 149l(a)(l). We reviewed the Complaint in a light most favorable to this plaintiff and took into consideration the court's obligation to consider allegations of pro se pleadings with wide latitude compared to those drafted by attorneys, nevertheless we cannot discern a claim within our jurisdiction. We do not have jurisdiction over social security claims. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Addams-More v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 312, 315 (2008). We do not hear tort claims of the nature described here, such as defamation or civil wrongs committed by agents of the United States. Brown v. United States, 35 Fed. Cl. 258, 267 (1996), aff'd, -1- 7017 2620 DODD 7637 4433 Dockets.Justia.com 105 F.3d 621, 624 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Our jurisdiction does not include claims based on criminal violations. Sanders v. United States, 252 F.3d 1329, 1333-34 (Fed. Cir. 2001). For the reasons stated herein, the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss pursuant to RCFC 12(6)(1) is GRANTED. Ms. Metts' Motion for Hearing is moot and therefore DENIED. No costs. IT IS SO ORDERED. i~= Judge -2-
]]>
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.
