White et al v. Department of Child Protective Services et al
Filing
8
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION: It is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. White's Complaint 1 is DISMISSED for lack of subject matter jurisdiction; 2. This action is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Court's docket; 3. A corresponding judgment will be entered this date. Signed by Judge Joseph M. Hood on 11/28/2017.(KM)cc: COR, Pltf via U.S. mail
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
CENTRAL DIVISION at LEXINGTON
RUBY WHITE,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILD
PROTECTIVE SERVICES, ET AL.,
Defendants.
***
***
Civil No. 17-439-JMH
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER
***
***
Ruby White is a resident of Richmond, Kentucky.
Proceeding
without a lawyer, White filed a complaint in which she names
Kentucky’s Department of Child Protective Services and multiple
social workers as defendants.
[R. 1].
The Court will dismiss White’s complaint because she has not
demonstrated that the Court has subject matter jurisdiction over
this
action.
After
all,
many
of
White’s
statements
are
unintelligible and, while White suggests that her claims arise
under the Fourteenth Amendment, it appears that she is simply
complaining about an ongoing child custody dispute.
[R. 1 at 4-
7]. The Sixth Circuit has repeatedly made it clear that “[f]ederal
courts have no jurisdiction to resolve domestic relations disputes
involving child custody.”
Partridge v. State of Ohio, 79 F. App’x
844, 845 (6th Cir. 2003) (citing Ankenbrandt v. Richards, 504 U.S.
689, 703 (1992)); see also Danforth v. Celebreeze, 76 F. App’x
615, 616 (6th Cir. 2003) (“[F]ederal courts lack jurisdiction where
the action is a mere pretense and the suit is actually concerned
with
domestic
relations
issues.”).
Thus,
the
Court
lacks
jurisdiction in this case.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. White’s complaint [R. 1] is DISMISSED for lack of subject
matter jurisdiction.
2. This action is DISMISSED and STRICKEN from the Court’s
docket.
3. A corresponding judgment will be entered this date.
This 28th day of November, 2017.
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?