Schindler v. Prince Georges County Office of Child Support

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM. Signed by Judge Paul W. Grimm on 11/5/2014. (c/m 11/6/2014 aos, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
CRYSTAL R. SCHINDLER,

*

Plaintiff

*

v

*

PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY OFFICE
OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT
Defendant

*

Civil Action No. PWG-14-3328

*

***

MEMORANDUM
The above-captioned case was opened on October 23, 2014 upon receipt of Plaintiff's
Complaint alleging she was subjected to "cruel and unusual punishment
harassment"

by Defendant Prince George's

CompI., ECF NO.1.

harsh and unnecessary

County Office of Child Support Enforcement.

Plaintiff indicates that despite her living on social security disability

benefits and being totally disabled with no means of supporting herself, Defendant seized her
Internal Revenue Service refund check "year after year." Attachment to Compl, ECF NO.1-I.
She alleges that Defendant is "acting on behalf of person who criminally persecuted [her], have
refused to allow visitation, and shifted children from state to state." Id. Plaintiff's Motion for
Leave to proceed in Forma Pauperis, ECF NO.2, shall be granted.
The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. First, Plaintiff's
allegations amount to a challenge of an existing state order requiring her payment of child
support, which this court does not have jurisdiction to review.

"Under the Rooker-Feldman!

[abstention] doctrine, a 'party losing in state court is barred from seeking what in substance
would be appellate review of the state judgment in a United States district court.'" Am. Reliable
Ins. v. Stillwell, 336 F. 3d 311, 316 (4th Cir. 2003) quoting Johnson v. De Grandy, 512 U.S. 997,
! D.C. Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 416
(1923).

1005-06 (1994)). The Rooker-Feldman

doctrine is jurisdictional and, as such, this court is free

to raise it sua sponte. Jordahl v. Democratic Party of Va., 122 F.3d 192, 197 n.5 (4th Cir.1997).
"[TJhe Rooker-Feldman

doctrine

. . . by elevating

substance

over form, preserves

the

independence of state courts as well as congressional intent that an appeal from a state court
decision must proceed through that state's system of appellate review rather than inferior federal
courts." Stillwell, 336 F. 3d at 391.
Secondly, the complaint fails to state a federal claim.
U.S.c.

S

To sustain an action under 42

1983, Plaintiff must demonstrate that: (1) she suffered a deprivation of rights secured

by the Constitution of the United States; and (2) the act or omission causing the deprivation was
committed by a person acting under color of law. West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42, 48 (1988). Prince
George's County Office of Child Support is not a "person" subject to suit or liability under

S

1983, and therefore Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which relief can be granted. See 28

U.S.C.

S

1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) (allowing for dismissal at any time if the Court determines a plaintiff

filing informa pauperis has failed to state a claim).
Plaintiffs

complaint shall be dismissed. A separate Order dismissing the Complaint

follows.

Paul W. rimm
United States District Judge