Summary
The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia grants the pro se plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis but dismisses the action without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court holds that it cannot review or alter decisions or actions of another federal district court or exercise jurisdiction over its judges.
Holdings
- A federal district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to review or alter the decisions or actions of another federal district court.
- The District Court for the District of Columbia lacked jurisdiction to exert jurisdiction over the judges of other federal district courts in connection with the challenged judicial actions.
Questions Presented
- Whether the District Court for the District of Columbia had subject matter jurisdiction to review or alter the decisions or actions of other federal district courts.
- Whether the court could exercise jurisdiction over judges of other federal district courts based on the plaintiff's challenge to their judicial actions.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (6)
- In re Marin, 956 F.2d 339 (D.C. Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Prentice v. U.S. Dist. Court for Eastern Dist. of Michigan, Southern Div., 307 F. App'x 460 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 29, 2008) (per curiam)(followed)
- Celotex Corp. v. Edwards, 514 U.S. 300, 313 (1995)(followed)
- Panko v. Rodak, 606 F.2d 168, 171 n.6 (7th Cir. 1979)(followed)
- United States v. Choi, 818 F. Supp. 2d 79, 85 (D.D.C. 2011)(followed)
- Lewis v. Green, 629 F. Supp. 546, 553 (D.D.C. 1986)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…