Jeep v. Government of the United States of America et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. 3 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on November 9, 2017. (BRP)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
DAVID GERARD JEEP,
GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED
STATES, et al.,
No. 4:17-CV-2690 AGF
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s complaint and motion for leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court is required to review the
complaint and dismiss it if it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief
can be granted.
Plaintiff alleges that his rights were violated by a state family court judge in 2003, when
the judge issued an order of protection barring him from contact with his ex-wife and granting
his ex-wife custody of their child. In his request for relief, plaintiff seeks to void the order of
protection and family court orders.
Plaintiff also complains that he was unjustly given a DWI without proper due process in
September of 2003 in Camden County, Missouri, and he seeks to have his state criminal
conviction overturned. The complaint relates plaintiff’s concerns about the unfairness of the
courts and the overreaching of governmental powers.
The complaint is substantially similar to several previous cases plaintiff has brought
before the Court, all of which were dismissed pre-service. E.g., Jeep v. Government of the
United States, 4:13-CV-2490 RWS (E.D. Mo.) (listing previous cases), in addition to, Jeep v.
Government of the United States, No. 4:14-CV-2009 DDN (E.D. Mo); Jeep v. Government of the
United States, No. 4:15-CV-1533 HEA (E.D. Mo); Jeep v. Government of the United States, No.
4:16-V-0810 CDP (E.D. Mo).
This Court lacks jurisdiction over family court matters. Kahn v. Kahn, 21 F.3d 859, 861
(8th Cir. 1994) (“The domestic relations exception . . . divests the federal courts of jurisdiction
over any action for which the subject is a divorce, allowance of alimony, or child custody.”). As
a result, plaintiff’s claims relating to his issues with the outcome of family court matters must be
dismissed under Rule 12(h)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The remainder of plaintiff’s claims are frivolous and malicious. The nature and tone of
the allegations against the remaining government defendants demonstrate that plaintiff’s purpose
is to harass the named judicial and governmental defendants 1 rather than vindicate a cognizable
Moreover, plaintiff’s request that this Court overturn his prior state court judgments is not
feasible. 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). In light of the aforementioned, this action is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF
No. 3] is GRANTED.
Plaintiff sues the Justices of the Supreme Court, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, several
judges of the United States District Court of the Eastern District of Missouri who have presided
over his past cases, President of the United States Barack Obama, members of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation and several state court Judges. Plaintiff seeks damages in excess of one
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.
Dated this 9th day of November, 2017.
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?