Christina Marie Evers v. Yolinda Johnson

Summary

The United States Magistrate Judge grants the pro se plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The document recommends denying the motion for a temporary restraining order and dismissing the complaint because the parties are both alleged to be California citizens and the complaint presents no federal question. It further recommends denying leave to amend as futile and advises the plaintiff of the 21-day period for filing objections.

Holdings

1. The complaint did not establish federal-question jurisdiction because it alleged no claim arising under federal law or the United States Constitution and identified no federal statute conferring jurisdiction.
2. The complaint did not establish diversity jurisdiction because both plaintiff and defendant were alleged to be citizens of Sacramento, California.
3. Because the court lacked federal subject matter jurisdiction, the motion for a temporary restraining order should be denied.
4. Leave to amend should be denied because amendment would be futile in light of the jurisdictional defects identified in the complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint established federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
2. Whether the complaint established diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a).
3. Whether the motion for a temporary restraining order could be considered in the absence of federal subject matter jurisdiction.
4. Whether leave to amend should be granted.

Disposition

other