UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
FILED
AUG Z 0 2010
) Clerk U.S. District &Bankruptcy
Tamica R. Whitaker, ) courtS for tile District of Columbia
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
Civil Action No.
10 1410
Shantell L. Whitaker, )
)
Defendant. )
)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs pro se complaint and application to proceed
in forma pauperis. The Court will grant plaintiff s 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. §§ 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 of the action. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3).
Plaintiff, a resident of the District of Columbia, sues another District of Columbia
resident for an alleged debt of $3,500. The complaint neither presents a federal question nor
provides a basis for diversity jurisdiction because the parties are not of diverse citizenship and
the amount in controversy is well below the jurisdictional minimum. Plaintiffs recourse lies, if
at all, in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. A separate Order of dismissal
accompanies this Memorandum Opinion.
Date: August jA-, 2010
2