Miller v. Stallworth et al
| Stephen Miller |
| Charles Stallworth, Maria Satterwhite-Porpora and ABRI |
| 3:2018cv01753 |
| October 23, 2018 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Michael P Shea |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 6, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 RESPONSE re 7 Order, filed by Stephen Miller. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Murphy, Tatihana) |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Change of Address by Stephen Miller (Murphy, Tatihana) |
| Filing 11 MOTION for Extension to Answer the Court by Stephen Miller. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Murphy, Tatihana) |
| Filing 10 RESPONSE re 7 Order, to Identify the Correct Jurisdiction. filed by Stephen Miller. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Murphy, Tatihana) |
| Filing 9 RESPONSE TO 6 Order to Show Cause filed by Stephen Miller. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Murphy, Tatihana) |
Filing 8
ORDER. In light of the order dismissing this case, the #2 motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 11/15/2018. (Guevremont, Nathan)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER. As stated in the Court's order on October 26, 2018 (ECF No. 6), the plaintiff's complaint does not appear to provide any basis for exercising subject matter jurisdiction over this case. The Court allowed the plaintiff 14 days to file an amended complaint that complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (requiring "a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction"). More than 14 days have passed and the plaintiff has not filed any amendment or requested an extension of time. The complaint is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice. The clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 11/14/2018. (Guevremont, Nathan)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Unlike state courts, federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Federal courts are not allowed to decide the merits of a case over which they lack jurisdiction, and they are required to raise jurisdictional issues even when none of the parties do. "If subject matter jurisdiction is lacking and no party has called the matter to the court's attention, the court has the duty to dismiss the action sua sponte." Durant, Nichols, Houston, Hodgson & Cortese-Costa P.C. v. Dupont, 565 F.3d 56, 62 (2d Cir. 2009). Liberally construing the plaintiff's allegations against the named defendants, the Complaint does not appear to raise any federal question under 28 U.S.C. 1331. The Complaint does not allege the citizenship of the defendants, but the facts alleged in the Complaint suggest that all parties are citizens of Connecticut. The Supreme Court "has read the statutory formulation 'between... citizens of different States,' 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(1), to require complete diversity between all plaintiffs and all defendants." Lincoln Prop. Co. v. Roche, 546 U.S. 81 (2005). Within 14 days the plaintiff shall file an amended complaint clearly establishing the basis for the Courts jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (requiring "a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction"). To demonstrate that the Court has diversity jurisdiction, the plaintiff must allege his own citizenship and that of each defendant and it must then appear that his citizenship is different from that of each defendant. 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(1). Alternatively, the plaintiff may establish that the Court has federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 by stating the specific federal law, treaty, or constitutional provision underlying his Complaint and alleging some facts that support a cause of action under federal law. Failure to respond to this order will result in the dismissal of the complaint without prejudice. Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 10/26/2018.(Guevremont, Nathan)
|
|
Filing 5
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 10/23/2018.(Murphy, Tatihana)
|
|
Filing 4
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER Signed by Judge Michael P. Shea on 10/23/2018.(Murphy, Tatihana)
|
|
Filing 3
Order on Pretrial Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 12/22/2018. Discovery due by 4/24/2019. Dispositive Motions due by 5/29/2019. Signed by Clerk on 10/23/2018.(Murphy, Tatihana)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Stephen Miller. (Murphy, Tatihana) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against ABRI, Maria Satterwhite-Porpora, Charles Stallworth, filed by Stephen Miller.(Murphy, Tatihana) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
