IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
October 3, 2008
DENNIS ANDREW BALL, PERSONALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE ELEANOR R. BALL LIVING TRUST, PLAINTIFF,
MID-COUNTRY BANKSHARES, D/B/A MID-COUNTRY BANK; THE NEELEY LAW FIRM; AND JOSEPH J. NEELEY, ESQ., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Stiehl, District Judge
Before the Court is plaintiff's pro se motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2). Before reaching the merits of plaintiff's motion, the Court must determine if it has jurisdiction over this matter and will construe plaintiff's pro se complaint liberally to determine if there is any manner in which the plaintiff would have a meritorious claim. Donald v. Cook County Sheriff's Dep't., 95 F.3d 548, 555 (7th Cir. 1996). Dennis Andrew Ball, a resident of Williamson County, Illinois, seeks recovery from three residents of Metropolis, Illinois, Mid-County Bank Shares d/b/a Mid-County Bank, The Neeley Law Firm, and Joseph J. Neeley, Esq. The complaint alleges that complete diversity between the parties serves as the basis for the Court's jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. However, the Court FINDS that it does not have jurisdiction because the parties to this lawsuit are not diverse. Although the underlying subject matter of this lawsuit involves an Arizona trust, that trust is not a party to this suit and, therefore, cannot create diversity jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the Court sua sponte DISMISSES this cause of action for want of jurisdiction. The Court, therefore, DENIES plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2), motion for mediation (Doc. 3), and motion for service of process (Doc. 4) as moot. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
WILLIAM D. STIEHL District Judge
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.