Samuel et al v. Francis et al

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs' motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis ECF Nos. 3 , 5 , 7 are GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for a temporary restraining order ECF No. 2 is DENIED as moot. An Order of Dismissal will be filed separately. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 11/20/15. (ARL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
WILBER CEDRIC SAMUEL SOLOMON,
CORNEL KINSLOW, and JAMES
WINFIELD KINSLOW,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JENNIFER ELIZABETH FRANCIS,
RJK MANAGEMENT, LLC, and JAY
BRAY,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:15CV1725 RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Plaintiffs seek leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this civil action under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 for alleged constitutional violations arising from a state court judgment quieting title on
real property.

The motions to proceed in forma pauperis are granted.

Additionally, after

reviewing the complaint, the Court finds that subject matter jurisdiction is lacking.
Standard of Review
Under Rule 12(h)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court is required to
dismiss a complaint at any time if subject matter jurisdiction does not exist.
“Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. The requirement that jurisdiction be
established as a threshold matter springs from the nature and limits of the judicial power of the
United States and is inflexible and without exception.” Kessler v. Nat’l Enterprises, Inc., 347
F.3d 1076, 1081 (8th Cir. 2003) (quotation marks omitted); see Kuhl v. Hampton, 451 F.2d 340,
342 (8th Cir. 1971) (federal courts “were not established to mediate any and all types of
complaints and alleged wrongs.”).

Discussion
This action arises out of a state court judgment to quiet title on property located at 8144
Washington Street, Saint Louis, 63114, RJK Management, LLC v. Cornel Kinslow, et al., No.
15SL-CC03115 (St. Louis County). Plaintiffs were the defendants in that action. In its judgment
dated November 9, 2015, the court ruled that “Plaintiff is the owner of the Property free and
clear of any interest claimed by Defendants and title to the Property is quieted in Plaintiff.” Id.
Plaintiffs claim that on July 14, 2015, Cornel Kinslow quit claimed the property to the
“Kinslow Family Private Trust,” which is alleged to be “a private irrevocable express trust under
the Common Law, of the Missouri republic within the unincorporated republic of the United
States of America.” They believe that, as a result of this transaction, the Kinslow Family Private
Trust is the sole owner of the property. Plaintiff Wilbur Solomon declares himself to be “a
Private American National of the United States of America, privately residing on Saint Louis
County.” Plaintiffs insist that they “are legally disabled and the Constitutional Trust is not seen
in a Roman Civil Martial Law venue.” Plaintiffs made the same arguments before the state
court.
Regardless of the language used by the plaintiffs, what they are doing is seeking an
appeal from a state court action. However, this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction
“over challenges to state court decisions in particular cases arising out of judicial proceedings
even if those challenges allege that the state court’s action was unconstitutional. Review of those
decisions may be had only in [the United States Supreme Court].” District of Columbia Court of
Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 486 (1983). As a result, this action is summarily dismissed.
Even if the Court were to have jurisdiction over plaintiff’s claims, it would still dismiss
this case under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) as factually and legally frivolous.

2

Finally, the Court notes that this is not the first frivolous lawsuit filed by plaintiff Wilbur
Solomon from a quiet title action.

See Solomon v. Fed. Nat’l Mort. Assoc., et al., No.

4:14CV1913 CDP (E.D. Mo.). Therefore, the Court dismisses this action with prejudice.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motions for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis [ECF Nos. 3, 5, 7] are GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs’ motion for a temporary restraining order
[ECF No. 2] is DENIED as moot.
An Order of Dismissal will be filed separately.
Dated this 20th day of November, 2015.

RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3