Presley Law and Associates, P.A. v. Wellington Reserve, LLC, 9:19-cv-80279-ROSENBERG/REINHART. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. Florida
Number: infdco20190301c24
Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 28, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 28, 2019
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT ROBIN L. ROSENBERG , District Judge . This cause is before the Court on a sua sponte review of the Complaint for subject matter jurisdiction. See Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405 , 410 (11th Cir. 1999) (stating that "a court should inquire into whether it has subject matter jurisdiction at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings" and that "a federal court is obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever i
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT ROBIN L. ROSENBERG , District Judge . This cause is before the Court on a sua sponte review of the Complaint for subject matter jurisdiction. See Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405 , 410 (11th Cir. 1999) (stating that "a court should inquire into whether it has subject matter jurisdiction at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings" and that "a federal court is obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it..
More
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT
ROBIN L. ROSENBERG, District Judge.
This cause is before the Court on a sua sponte review of the Complaint for subject matter jurisdiction. See Univ. of S. Ala. v. Am. Tobacco Co., 168 F.3d 405, 410 (11th Cir. 1999) (stating that "a court should inquire into whether it has subject matter jurisdiction at the earliest possible stage in the proceedings" and that "a federal court is obligated to inquire into subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte whenever it may be lacking"). Plaintiff relies on federal question jurisdiction as a basis for this Court's subject matter jurisdiction. See DE 1 at 2; see also 28 U.S.C. § 1331. However, Plaintiff raises common law claims of breach of contract and breach of the implied warranty of good faith and fair dealing. See DE 1 at 5. Plaintiff also alleges violations of criminal laws, but fails to provide the basis for a private cause of action for any of the alleged criminal violations. See id. at 2-3. Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate this Court's subject matter jurisdiction. See Sweet Pea Marine, Ltd. v. APJ Marine, Inc., 411 F.3d 1242, 1247 (11th Cir. 2005) ("The burden for establishing federal subject matter jurisdiction rests with the party bringing the claim.").
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. Plaintiff's Complaint [DE 1] is DISMISSED.
2. The Clerk of the Court is instructed to CLOSE THIS CASE.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
