Jenkins v. Clinton
2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31351
| D.D.C. | 2013Background
- Jenkins, a UK pro se plaintiff, sued sixteen defendants including Florida state judges and federal officers, alleging RICO and sexual discrimination claims tied to Florida foreclosure litigation.
- Plaintiff filed a lis pendens in Misc. Action No. 12-00665 asserting ownership interests in Florida real property.
- Defendants moved to dismiss: several Florida judges (for lack of personal jurisdiction and judicial immunity) and federal defendants (for failure to state a claim).
- Plaintiff moved for defaults, to add defendants, vacate orders, and recuse the district judge; multiple extensions and procedural rulings followed.
- Court held the federal claims insufficient under Rule 12(b)(6) and the Florida claims barred by judicial immunity and lack of jurisdiction, and cancelled the lis pendens.
- Court dismissed the entire civil action and misc. action with prejudice and denied most of Jenkins’ ancillary motions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Federal Defendants can be liable under RICO or related theory. | Jenkins asserts Federal Defendants have duties to protect non-citizens and should be liable for violations. | Kerry and Holder did not participate in the Florida foreclosure litigation; no actionable duties proven. | Claims against Federal Defendants dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6). |
| Whether the Court has personal jurisdiction over Florida Defendants. | Plaintiff contends Florida officials have forum connections; DC and government contacts support jurisdiction. | Defendants lack DC domicile/contacts; no acts within DC to sustain jurisdiction. | Court lacks personal jurisdiction over May, Brown, Polen, Hazouris, and Kelley; dismissal with prejudice. |
| Whether Florida judges are immune from suit for judicial acts. | Plaintiff seeks declaratory relief and accountability for alleged misconduct by judges. | Judges immune for acts within judicial capacity unless jurisdiction entirely absent. | Dismissal with prejudice due to judicial immunity. |
| Whether the lis pendens and related motions should be addressed given jurisdictional issues. | Lis pendens properly filed to reflect pending litigation affecting Florida real property. | Lis pendens not warranted; real property located in Florida; no ownership relief in the DC action. | Lis pendens removed; Misc. Action 12-00665 dismissed. |
| Whether Jenkins’ various motions should be granted or denied given the court’s jurisdiction and prior injunctive history. | Requests for defaults, leave to serve, and vacating orders should be granted. | Actions barred by lack of jurisdiction and prior injunctions; improper service and extension abuse. | Motions denied; dismissal with prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540 (1994) (judicial rulings alone rarely justify recusal; requires extrajudicial bias)
- Mireles v. Waco, 502 U.S. 9 (1991) (judicial immunity for acts within jurisdiction)
- World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286 (1980) (minimum contacts and purposeful availment under due process)
- Asahi Metal Indus. Co. v. Superior Court, 480 U.S. 102 (1987) (minimum contacts test for personal jurisdiction)
- Mwani v. bin Laden, 417 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (court must determine personal jurisdiction before judgment; pro se cannot bypass)