Alexander v. Rogers et al

Filing 5

ORDER DISMISSING CASE for lack of jurisdiction; denying 3 MOTION to Appoint Counsel; denying 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Duke Alexander. Signed by Judge William R. Wilson Jr. on 1/22/07. (mkf, )

Download PDF
Alexander v. Rogers et al Doc. 5 Case 4:07-cv-00018-WRW Document 5 Filed 01/22/2007 Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION DUKE ALEXANDER v. JOHN COLLINS ROGERS and WILLIAM WATT ORDER Pending is Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. No. 1) and Motion to Appoint Counsel (Doc. No. 3). A question of subject-matter jurisdiction may be raised sua sponte at any time.1 "Whenever it appears . . . that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the action."2 After reviewing the complaint, it is clear that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction -- although Plaintiff speaks of a "Federal Court Order," his allegations involve a state court order. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Motion to Appoint Counsel are DENIED and this case is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of January, 2007. /s/ Wm. R.Wilson,Jr. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE PLAINTIFF No. 4:07-CV-00018-WRW DEFENDANTS 1 Bueford v. Resolution Trust Corp., 991 F.2d 481, 485 (8th Cir. 1993). Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(h)(3). 1 2

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.

Why Is My Information Online?