Lucy Clark v. Michael Rosenthal and Kevin McClanahan

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Kansas dismissed pro se plaintiff Lucy Clark’s complaint against Michael Rosenthal and Kevin McClanahan without prejudice. The court held that the conclusory allegations failed to state a claim, establish subject-matter jurisdiction, or demonstrate personal jurisdiction and proper venue, and it dismissed the pending fee-waiver motion as moot.

Holdings

1. The complaint failed to comply with Rule 8 and failed to state a claim because it consisted entirely of conclusory assertions and omitted factual allegations identifying the defendants' conduct, authority, and the manner in which plaintiff's rights were violated.
2. The complaint failed to establish federal-question jurisdiction because it did not identify a federal statute or constitutional provision under which the claim arose and did not allege facts showing that the action arose under federal law.
3. The complaint failed to establish diversity jurisdiction because it did not allege an amount in controversy exceeding $75,000 or the citizenship of the plaintiff and each defendant.
4. Dismissal without prejudice was warranted because plaintiff failed to carry her burden of establishing subject-matter jurisdiction.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint satisfied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and stated a claim upon which relief could be granted.
2. Whether the complaint established federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
3. Whether the complaint established diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
4. Whether the complaint provided a basis for personal jurisdiction over the defendants or established Kansas as a proper venue.

Disposition

dismissed