Opinion
Civil Action No. 20-0396 (UNA)
03-06-2020
MEMORANDUM OPINION
In 2005, the plaintiff filed a civil action in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma against the State of New Hampshire. See Compl. at 1. The court dismissed the case as frivolous. see Azubuko v. New Hampshire, No. 5:05-cv-0176-C (W.D. Okla. Feb. 23, 2005). With respect to the plaintiff's appeal of a post-judgment motion, the court denied plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis on the ground that the appeal was not taken in good faith. See Azubuko v. New Hampshire, No. 5:05-cv-0176-C (W.D. Okla. June 9, 2005). This matter has come before the Court on review of the plaintiff's pro se complaint, which asks this Court to vacate the Oklahoma district court's rulings and enter judgment in the plaintiff's favor. Compl. at 5.
As a general rule applicable here, a federal district court lacks jurisdiction to review the decisions of other courts. See e.g., Petrovic v. United States, No. 1:19-CV-00482, 2019 WL 1746301, at *2 (D.D.C. Apr. 17, 2019), appeal dismissed, No. 19-5129, 2019 WL 5692686 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 6, 2019), and appeal dismissed, No. 19-5139, 2019 WL 5963409 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 6, 2019); United States v. Choi, 818 F. Supp. 2d 79, 85 (D.D.C. 2011) (citing Lewis v. Green, 629 F. Supp. 546, 553 (D.D.C. 1986)); Fleming v. United States, 847 F. Supp. 170, 172 (D.D.C. 1994) (applying District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 482 (1983), and Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 415, 416 (1923) ), aff'd, No. 94-5079, 1994 WL 474995 (D.C. Cir. 1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1150 (1995).
Because this Court lacks jurisdiction and cannot grant the relief the plaintiff seeks, the complaint and this civil action will be dismissed. The Court also will grant the plaintiff Azubuko's application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss Okereke as a party plaintiff. An Order consistent is issued separately. DATE: March 6, 2020
/s/
TREVOR N. McFADDEN
United States District Judge