Bas Tysion El & Success Is Yours v. Woodmont Properties Parkland et al

Filing 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Paul W. Grimm on 4/18/2016. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk)(c/m 4/19/16)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
BAS TYSION EL & SUCCESS IS YOURS,

*

Plaintiffs,

*

v.

CIVIL NO. PWG-16-497

WOODMONT PROPERTIES PARKLAND,
PARKLAND SHOPPING CENTER, &
CARTER SMITH,
Defendants.

*
*
*
***

MEMORANDUM
The above-captioned

complaint alleging breach of contract was filed on February 22,

2016 by Bas Tysion EI, a self-represented plaintiffl who resides in Largo, Maryland, purportedly
on behalf of himself and his business, "Success is Yours." CompI., ECF NO.1. Plaintiff claims
that he entered into a lease with Defendants to operate Success is Yours in the Parkland
Shopping Center, located in District Heights, Maryland, and operated by Woodmont Properties,
which appears to be a management company operating in Bethesda, Maryland.2

Plaintiff is

seeking damages totaling $175,000, alleging fraud under the lease as well as a failure to make
repairs. Id. at 1-3.
The complaint is deficient in several respects.

Under the rules of this Court, only

individuals may represent themselves. See Loc. R. 101.I(a) (Md. 2014).

1

Mr. Tysion EI's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No.2) shall be granted.

See www.woodmontproperty.com/property-parkland.php
www.woodmontproperty.com/property-bethesda.php.
2

Therefore, Mr. Tysion

and

EI may not represent the entity known as "Success is Yours." Such an entity may only proceed
with legal action in this Court through the representation of counsel. See id. This deficiency in
and of itself is not fatal to the complaint.
The more significant deficiency in the complaint is jurisdictional.

Federal courts are

courts of limited jurisdiction and "may not exercise jurisdiction absent a statutory basis." Exxon
Mobil Corp. v. Allapattah Servs., Inc., 545 U.S. 546, 552 (2005). They "have an independent
obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even when no party challenges
it." Hertz Corp. v. Friend, 559 U.S. 77, 130 S. Ct. 1181, 1193 (2010). Under the "well-pleaded
complaint"

rule, the facts showing the existence of subject matter jurisdiction

affirmatively alleged in the complaint." Pinkley, Inc. v. City a/Frederick,

"must be

191 F.3d 394,399 (4th

Cir. 1999) (citing McNutt v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp., 298 U.S. 178 (1936)).
"A court is to presume, therefore, that a case lies outside its limited jurisdiction unless
and until jurisdiction has been shown to be proper." United States v. Poole, 531 F.3d 263, 274
(4th Cir. 2008) (citing Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 511 U.S. 375, 377 (1994)).
Moreover, the "burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction is on ... the party asserting
jurisdiction."

Robb Evans & Assocs., LLC v. Holibaugh, 609 F.3d 359, 362 (4th Cir. 2010);

accord Hertz, 130 S. Ct. at 1194; McBurney v. Cuccinelli, 616 F.3d 393, 408 (4th Cir. 2010).
The complaint presents no federal issue; rather, the cause of action is more closely akin to
a breach of contract claim which, under some circumstances, may be litigated federal court under
its diversity jurisdiction.

See 28 U.S.C.

S 1332(a).

This Court has original jurisdiction over civil

actions where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is
between citizens of different states. Id. The statute "requires complete diversity among parties,
meaning that the citizenship of every plaintiff must be different from the citizenship of every
2

defendant."

Cent. W Va. Energy Co. v. Mountain State Carbon, LLC, 636 F.3d 101, 103 (4th

Cir. 2011) (citing Caterpillar, Inc. v. Lewis, 519 U.S. 61, 68 (1996)).
While the damages claimed by Mr. Tysion El are sufficient to satisfy the amount in
controversy requirement, he and at least one of the defendants reside or operates in Maryland,
which is where the leased property is located. See Civil Cover Sheet, ECF No.1-I;
ECF Nos. 1-2, 1-3, 1-4. Thus, this Court may not exercise diversity jurisdiction.

Summons,

Absent a basis

for jurisdiction, the case must be dismissed without prejudic .
A separate order follows.

Paul W. Grimm
United States District Judge

3 Plaintiff may pursue his claim in the appropriate state court. I make no finding as to the merit
of the claim.

3